Lipid Testing Trends Before and After Hospitalization for Myocardial Infarction Among Adults in the United States, 2008–2019

Background: Routine monitoring of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) identifies patients who may benefit from modifying lipid-lowering therapies (LLT). However, the extent to which LDL-C testing is occurring in clinical practice is unclear, specifically among patients hospitalized for a myocardial infarction (MI). Methods: Using US commercial claims data, we identified patients with an incident MI hospitalization between 01/01/2008-03/31/2019. LDL-C testing was assessed in the year before admission (pre-MI) and the year after discharge (post-MI). Changes in LDL-C testing were evaluated using a Poisson model fit to pre-MI rates and extrapolated to the post-MI period. We predicted LDL-C testing rates if no MI had occurred (ie, based on pre-MI trends) and estimated rate differences and ratios (contrasting observed vs predicted rates). Results: Overall, 389,367 patients were hospitalized for their first MI during the study period. In the month following discharge, 9% received LDL-C testing, increasing to 27% at 3 months and 52% at 12 months. Mean rates (tests per 1000 patients per month) in the pre-and post-MI periods were 51.9 (95% CI: 51.7, 52.1) and 84.4 (95% CI: 84.1, 84.6), respectively. Over 12 months post-MI, observed rates were higher than predicted rates; the maximum rate difference was 66 tests per 1000 patients in month 2 (rate ratio 2.2), stabilizing at a difference of 15–20 (ratio 1.2–1.3) for months 6–12. Conclusion: Although LDL-C testing increased following MI hospitalization, rates remained lower than recommended by clinical guidelines. This highlights a potential gap in care, where increased LDL-C testing after MI may provide opportunities for LLT modification and decrease risk of subsequent cardiovascular events

Lipid testing trends in the us before and after the release of the 2013 cholesterol treatment guidelines

Background: The 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol treatment guidelines removed the recom-mendation to treat adults at risk of cardiovascular disease to goal levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We anticipated that the frequency of LDL-C testing in clinical practice would decline as a result. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated the frequency of LDL-C testing before and after the guideline release. Methods: We used the MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims data (1/1/2007–12/31/2016) to identify four cohorts: 1) statin initiators (any intensity), 2) high-intensity statin initiators, 3) ezetimibe initiators, and 4) patients at very high cardiovascular risk (≥2 hospitalizations for myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke, with prevalent statin use). Rates of LDL-C testing by calendar year quarter were estimated for each cohort. To estimate rates in the absence of a guideline change, we fit a time-series model to the pre-guideline rates and extrapolated to the post-guideline period, adjusting for covariates, seasonality, and time trend. Results: Pre-and post-guideline rates (LDL-C tests per 1,000 persons per quarter) were 248 and 235, respectively, for 3.9 million statin initiators; 263 and 246 for 1.3 million high-intensity statin initiators; 277 and 261 for 323,544 ezetimibe initiators; and 180 and 158 for 42,108 very high-risk patients. For all cohorts, observed post-guideline rates were similar to model-predicted rates. On average, the difference between observed and predicted rates was 8.5 for patients initiating any statin; 2.6 for patients initiating a high-intensity statin; 11.4 for patients initiating ezetimibe, and −0.5 for high-risk patients. Conclusion: We observed no discernible impact of the release of the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines on LDL-C testing rates. Rather, there was a gradual decline in testing rates starting prior to the guideline change and continuing throughout the study period. Our findings suggest that the guidelines had little to no impact on use of LDL-C testing

Toward a Multifaceted Heuristic of Digital Reading to Inform Assessment, Research, Practice, and Policy

In this commentary, the author explores the tension between almost 30 years of work that has embraced increasingly complex conceptions of digital reading and recent studies that risk oversimplifying digital reading as a singular entity analogous with reading text on a screen. The author begins by tracing a line of theoretical and empirical work that both informs and complicates our understanding of digital literacy and, more specifically, digital reading. Then, a heuristic is proposed to systematically organize, label, and define a multifaceted set of increasingly complex terms, concepts, and practices that characterize the spectrum of digital reading experiences. Research that informs this heuristic is used to illustrate how more precision in defining digital reading can promote greater clarity across research methods and advance a more systematic study of promising digital reading practices. Finally, the author discusses implications for assessment, research, practice, and policy

Foreign multinationals in UK retailing, 1850-1962 Some new data

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3597.95803(259) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Public dreams, private means Lessons from Cincinnati and its Southern Railway, 1896-1901

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3597.9407(389) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Foreign direct investment in British retailing, 1850-1962

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3597.94803(273) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

International retailing in Britain, 1850-1994

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:3597.948030(275) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Directory of centres for outdoor studies in England and Wales

SIGLED:84/08921(Directory) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply Centre3. ed.GBUnited Kingdo

An analysis of Farm Management Services costed mixed farms 1987-8

5.00Available from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:7546.31(MMB-FMS-R--63) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

An analysis of Farm Management Services costed dairy farms 1987-8

5.00SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:7546.31(MMB-FMS-R--62) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo