Ravi S Hira1, Kevin Kennedy2, Vijay Nambi3, Hani Jneid3, Mahboob Alam1, Sukhdeep S Basra1, P Michael Ho4, Anita Deswal3, Christie M Ballantyne1, Laura A Petersen5, Salim S Virani6. 1. Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 2. Mid America Heart Institute, Saint Luke's Hospital, Kansas City, Missouri. 3. Michael E. DeBakey Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 4. University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. 5. Michael E. DeBakey Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Health Policy, Quality and Informatics Program, Michael E. DeBakey Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Health Services Research and Development Center for Innovations, Houston, Texas; Section of Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 6. Michael E. DeBakey Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Health Policy, Quality and Informatics Program, Michael E. DeBakey Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Health Services Research and Development Center for Innovations, Houston, Texas; Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: virani@bcm.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among patients without cardiovascular disease (CVD) and low 10-year CVD risk, the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic strokes associated with aspirin use outweigh any potential atheroprotective benefit. According to the guidelines on primary prevention of CVD, aspirin use is considered appropriate only in patients with 10-year CVD risk ≥6% and inappropriate in patients with 10-year CVD risk <6%. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the frequency and practice-level variation in inappropriate aspirin use for primary prevention in a large U.S. nationwide registry. METHODS: Within the National Cardiovascular Disease Registry's Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence registry, we assessed 68,808 unique patients receiving aspirin for primary prevention from 119 U.S. practices. The frequency of inappropriate aspirin use was determined for primary prevention (aspirin use in those with 10-year CVD risk <6%). Using hierarchical regression models, the extent of practice-level variation using the median rate ratio (MRR) was assessed. RESULTS:Inappropriate aspirin use frequency was 11.6% (7,972 of 68,808) in the overall cohort. There was significant practice-level variation in inappropriate use (range 0% to 71.8%; median 10.1%; interquartile range 6.4%) for practices; adjusted MRR was 1.63 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47 to 1.77). Results remained consistent after excluding 21,052 women age ≥65 years (inappropriate aspirin use 15.2%; median practice-level inappropriate aspirin use 13.8%; interquartile range 8.2%; adjusted MRR 1.61 [95% CI: 1.46 to 1.75]) and after excluding patients with diabetes (inappropriate aspirin use 13.9%; median practice-level inappropriate aspirin use 12.4%; interquartile range 7.6%; adjusted MRR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.41 to 1.67]). CONCLUSIONS: More than 1 in 10 patients in this national registry were receivinginappropriate aspirin therapy for primary prevention, with significant practice-level variations. Our findings suggest that there are important opportunities to improve evidence-based aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Among patients without cardiovascular disease (CVD) and low 10-year CVD risk, the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic strokes associated with aspirin use outweigh any potential atheroprotective benefit. According to the guidelines on primary prevention of CVD, aspirin use is considered appropriate only in patients with 10-year CVD risk ≥6% and inappropriate in patients with 10-year CVD risk <6%. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the frequency and practice-level variation in inappropriate aspirin use for primary prevention in a large U.S. nationwide registry. METHODS: Within the National Cardiovascular Disease Registry's Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence registry, we assessed 68,808 unique patients receiving aspirin for primary prevention from 119 U.S. practices. The frequency of inappropriate aspirin use was determined for primary prevention (aspirin use in those with 10-year CVD risk <6%). Using hierarchical regression models, the extent of practice-level variation using the median rate ratio (MRR) was assessed. RESULTS: Inappropriate aspirin use frequency was 11.6% (7,972 of 68,808) in the overall cohort. There was significant practice-level variation in inappropriate use (range 0% to 71.8%; median 10.1%; interquartile range 6.4%) for practices; adjusted MRR was 1.63 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47 to 1.77). Results remained consistent after excluding 21,052 women age ≥65 years (inappropriate aspirin use 15.2%; median practice-level inappropriate aspirin use 13.8%; interquartile range 8.2%; adjusted MRR 1.61 [95% CI: 1.46 to 1.75]) and after excluding patients with diabetes (inappropriate aspirin use 13.9%; median practice-level inappropriate aspirin use 12.4%; interquartile range 7.6%; adjusted MRR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.41 to 1.67]). CONCLUSIONS: More than 1 in 10 patients in this national registry were receiving inappropriate aspirin therapy for primary prevention, with significant practice-level variations. Our findings suggest that there are important opportunities to improve evidence-based aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD.
Authors: Faraz Kureshi; Ali Shafiq; Suzanne V Arnold; Kensey Gosch; Tracie Breeding; Ashwath S Kumar; Philip G Jones; John A Spertus Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2016-11-07 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Yashashwi Pokharel; Julia M Akeroyd; David J Ramsey; Ravi S Hira; Vijay Nambi; Tina Shah; LeChauncy D Woodard; David E Winchester; Christie M Ballantyne; Laura A Petersen; Salim S Virani Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2016-04-05 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Emelia J Benjamin; Michael J Blaha; Stephanie E Chiuve; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Rajat Deo; Sarah D de Ferranti; James Floyd; Myriam Fornage; Cathleen Gillespie; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Lori Chaffin Jordan; Suzanne E Judd; Daniel Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Chris T Longenecker; Rachel H Mackey; Kunihiro Matsushita; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Mathew J Reeves; Matthew Ritchey; Carlos J Rodriguez; Gregory A Roth; Wayne D Rosamond; Comilla Sasson; Amytis Towfighi; Connie W Tsao; Melanie B Turner; Salim S Virani; Jenifer H Voeks; Joshua Z Willey; John T Wilkins; Jason Hy Wu; Heather M Alger; Sally S Wong; Paul Muntner Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Salim S Virani; Thomas M Maddox; Paul S Chan; Fengming Tang; Julia M Akeroyd; Samantha A Risch; William J Oetgen; Anita Deswal; Biykem Bozkurt; Christie M Ballantyne; Laura A Petersen Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Hasan Rehman; Julia M Akeroyd; David Ramsey; Sarah T Ahmed; Anwar T Merchant; Sankar D Navaneethan; Laura A Petersen; Salim S Virani Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2017-08-25 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Sankar D Navaneethan; Julia M Akeroyd; David Ramsey; Sarah T Ahmed; Shiva Raj Mishra; Laura A Petersen; Paul Muntner; Christie Ballantyne; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Venkat Ramanathan; Salim S Virani Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Michael L O'Byrne; Andrew C Glatz; Lihai Song; Heather M Griffis; Marisa E Millenson; Matthew J Gillespie; Yoav Dori; Aaron G DeWitt; Christopher E Mascio; Jonathan J Rome Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 29.690