Urban-rural disparities in diabetes-related mortality in the USA 1999-2019.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Our study aimed to examine the trends in diabetes-related mortality in urban and rural areas in the USA over the past two decades. METHODS: We examined the trends in diabetes-related mortality (as the underlying or a contributing cause of death) in urban and rural areas in the USA between 1999 and 2019, using the CDC WONDER Multiple Cause of Death database. We estimated the 20 year trends of the age-adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) per 100,000 population in urban vs rural counties. RESULTS: The AAMR of diabetes was higher in rural than urban areas across all subgroups. In urban areas, there was a significant decrease in the AAMR of diabetes as the underlying (-16.7%) and contributing (-13.5%) cause of death (ptrend<0.001), which was not observed in rural areas (+2.6%, +8.9%, respectively). AAMRs of diabetes decreased more significantly in female compared with male individuals, both in rural and urban areas. Among people younger than 55 years old, there was a temporal increase in diabetes-related AAMR (+13.8% to +65.2%). While the diabetes-related AAMRs of American Indian patients decreased in all areas (-19.8% to -40.5%, all ptrend<0.001), diabetes-related AAMRs of Black and White patients decreased significantly in urban (-26.6% to -28.3% and -10.7% to -15.4%, respectively, all ptrend<0.001) but not rural areas (-6.5% to +1.8%, +2.4% to +10.6%, respectively, ptrend NS, NS, NS and <0.001). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The temporal decrease in diabetes-related mortality in the USA has been observed only in urban areas, and mainly among female and older patients. A synchronised effort is needed to improve cardiovascular health indices and healthcare access in rural areas and to decrease diabetes-related mortality

A review of interventions to improve clinical outcomes following hospitalisation for heart failure

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalisation and death among older adults in high-income countries. HF is often accompanied by comorbid conditions, and patients hospitalised for HF commonly die or are readmitted in the weeks follow- ing hospital discharge. The objectives of this paper are to discuss the burden of HF hospitalisations in healthcare systems and to review strategies that reduce hospitalisations and death in this condition

Temporal Trends and Clinical Trial Characteristics Associated with the Inclusion of Women in Heart Failure Trial Steering Committees:A Systematic Review

Background: Trial steering committees (TSCs) steer the conduct of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We examined the gender composition of TSCs in impactful heart failure RCTs and explored whether trial leadership by a woman was independently associated with the inclusion of women in TSCs. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for heart failure RCTs published in journals with impact factor ≥10 between January 2000 and May 2019. We used the Jonckheere-Terpstra test to assess temporal trends and multivariable logistic regression to explore trial characteristics associated with TSC inclusion of women. Results: Of 403 RCTs that met inclusion criteria, 127 (31.5%) reported having a TSC but 20 of these (15.7%) did not identify members. Among 107 TSCs that listed members, 56 (52.3%) included women and 6 of these (10.7%) restricted women members to the RCT leaders. Of 1213 TSC members, 11.1% (95% CI, 9.4%-13.0%) were women, with no change in temporal trends (P=0.55). Women had greater odds of TSC inclusion in RCTs led by women (adjusted odds ratio, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.05-8.72], P=0.042); this association was nonsignificant when analysis excluded TSCs that restricted women to the RCT leaders (adjusted odds ratio 1.46 [95% CI, 0.43-4.91], P=0.36). Conclusions: Women were included in 52.3% of TSCs and represented 11.1% of TSC members in 107 heart failure RCTs, with no change in trends since 2000. RCTs led by women had higher adjusted odds of including women in TSCs, partly due to the self-inclusion of RCT leaders in TSCs

Barriers and facilitators of the uptake of digital health technology in cardiovascular care: a systematic scoping review.

Digital health technology (DHT) has the potential to revolutionize healthcare delivery but its uptake has been low in clinical and research settings. The factors that contribute to the limited adoption of DHT, particularly in cardiovascular settings, are unclear. The objective of this review was to determine the barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake from the perspective of patients, clinicians, and researchers. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for studies published from inception to May 2020 that reported barriers and/or facilitators of DHT adoption in cardiovascular care. We extracted data on study design, setting, cardiovascular condition, and type of DHT. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake. The search identified 3075 unique studies, of which 29 studies met eligibility criteria. Studies employed: qualitative methods (n = 13), which included interviews and focus groups; quantitative methods (n = 5), which included surveys; or a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (n = 11). Twenty-five studies reported patient-level barriers, most common of which were difficult-to-use technology (n=7) and a poor internet connection (n=7). Six studies reported clinician-level barriers, which included increased workload (n=4) and a lack of integration with electronic medical records (n=3).Twenty-four studies reported patient-level facilitators, which included improved communication with clinicians (n=10) and personalized technology (n=6). Four studies reported clinician-level facilitators, which included approval and organizational support from cardiology departments and/or hospitals (n=3) and technologies that improved efficiency (n=3). No studies reported researcher-level barriers or facilitators. In summary, internet access, user-friendliness, organizational support, workflow efficiency, and data integration were reported as important factors in the uptake of DHT by patients and clinicians. These factors can be considered when selecting and implementing DHTs in cardiovascular clinical settings

Sex-Specific Differences in Heart Failure:Pathophysiology, Risk Factors, Management, and Outcomes

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalisation, morbidity, and mortality in Canada. There are sex-specific differences in the etiology, epidemiology, comorbidities, treatment response, and treatment adverse effects that have implications on outcomes in HF. Sex-specific analyses of some HF trials indicate that optimal doses of drug therapies and benefit of device therapies may differ between male and female patients, but the trials were not designed to test sex differences. The under-representation of female participants in HF randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is a major limitation in assessing the sex-specific efficacy and safety of treatments. To ensure that female patients receive safe and effective HF therapies, RCTs should include participants proportionate to the sex-specific distribution of disease. This review outlines the sex-specific differences in HF phenotype and treatment response, and highlights disparities in services and gaps in knowledge that merit further investigation

Simulation-based optimal Bayesian experimental design for nonlinear systems

The optimal selection of experimental conditions is essential to maximizing the value of data for inference and prediction, particularly in situations where experiments are time-consuming and expensive to conduct. We propose a general mathematical framework and an algorithmic approach for optimal experimental design with nonlinear simulation-based models; in particular, we focus on finding sets of experiments that provide the most information about targeted sets of parameters. Our framework employs a Bayesian statistical setting, which provides a foundation for inference from noisy, indirect, and incomplete data, and a natural mechanism for incorporating heterogeneous sources of information. An objective function is constructed from information theoretic measures, reflecting expected information gain from proposed combinations of experiments. Polynomial chaos approximations and a two-stage Monte Carlo sampling method are used to evaluate the expected information gain. Stochastic approximation algorithms are then used to make optimization feasible in computationally intensive and high-dimensional settings. These algorithms are demonstrated on model problems and on nonlinear parameter estimation problems arising in detailed combustion kinetics.Comment: Preprint 53 pages, 17 figures (54 small figures). v1 submitted to the Journal of Computational Physics on August 4, 2011; v2 submitted on August 12, 2012. v2 changes: (a) addition of Appendix B and Figure 17 to address the bias in the expected utility estimator; (b) minor language edits; v3 submitted on November 30, 2012. v3 changes: minor edit

Distribution, management and outcomes of AMI according to principal diagnosis priority during inpatient admission

Peer reviewedPostprin

Observed and expected serious adverse event rates in randomised clinical trials for hypertension:An observational study comparing trials which do and do not focus on older people

Background: Representativeness of antihypertensive drug trials is uncertain, as many trials recruit few or no older people. Some trials specifically recruit older participants to address this. Here, we assess the representativeness of trials focusing on older people by comparing the rates of serious adverse events in these trials with the rates in trials of a general adult population (ie, standard trials), and comparing these findings to the rate of hospitalisations and deaths in people with hypertension starting a similar treatment in routine clinical practice. Methods: For this observational study, we identified randomised controlled trials (phase 2/3, 3, or 4) of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) drugs for hypertension registered from 1999 onwards with ClinicalTrials.gov. Serious adverse events are routinely included in trial reports and are predominantly accounted for by all-cause hospitalisations and deaths. We compared serious adverse event rates in older-people trials (minimum inclusion age ≥60 years) and standard trials (minimum inclusion age &lt;60 years) using Poisson regression models adjusted for trial characteristics (drug type, comparison type, phase, and outcome type). We identified a community cohort of 56 036 adults with hypertension commencing similar drugs to obtain an expected rate of emergency or urgent hospitalisations or deaths, and compared this rate to observed serious adverse event rates in each trial, adjusted for age and sex. For standard trials and for older-people trials, we calculated the standardised ratio of the expected to the observed rate of serious adverse events using Poisson regression models. Findings: We included 110 trials, of which 11 (10%) were older-people trials and 99 (90%) were standard trials. Older-people trials had a higher rate of serious adverse events than did standard trials (median events per person per year 0·18 [IQR 0·12–0·29] vs 0·11 [0·08–0·18]; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1·76 [95% CI 1·01–3·03]). The hospitalisation and death rate in the community for those taking RAAS antihypertensives was much greater than the rate of serious adverse events reported in standard trials (standardised ratio [SR] 4·23, 95% CI 3·51–5·09) and older-people trials (4·76, 2·89–7·86), adjusting for age and sex. The magnitude of risk increase for serious adverse events in community patients taking RAAS did not differ when comparing older-people and standard trials (ratio of SRs 1·13, 95% CI 0·66–1·92). Interpretation: Trials report substantially fewer serious adverse events than expected from rates of hospitalisations and deaths among similar-aged people receiving equivalent treatments in the community. Serious adverse event rates might be a useful metric to assess trial representativeness. Clinicians should be cautious when applying trial recommendations to older people, even when trials focus on older participants. Funding: Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council