Management and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Cardiovascular Evaluation Across Health Care Systems: Comparison of Community Care and Integrated Veterans Affairs Health Care

Background The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System maintains the largest integrated health system in the United States but also supports fee‐for‐service insurance for veterans receiving care in community facilities outside the VA. We sought to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients referred for consultation in either venue, using cardiovascular evaluation as a model. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study identifying patients enrolled in the VA Healthcare System referred for cardiovascular evaluation from October 2020 through September 2024 and stratified the population based on the venue in which evaluation was completed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (acute coronary syndromes/stroke/mortality) in a matched population. Results Among 235 197 consultations for cardiovascular evaluation, 201 453 were completed in the chosen venue within 6 months. The time between consultation and evaluation was similar across venues (community, 35 days 95% CI, 17–65 versus VA, 33 days 95% CI, 19–53), with comparable delays to diagnostic testing or therapeutic interventions. Patients receiving care in the community were more likely to undergo stress testing (43.2% versus 36.4%, P =1.5×10 −46 ) and coronary angiography (23.1% versus 17.4%, P =2.1×10 −51 ) within 2 years compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System. Despite this, patients treated in the community had a significantly higher rate of major adverse events at 2 years (17.6% versus 15.3%, P =5.9×10 −10 ) compared with those treated in the VA Healthcare System. Conclusions Patients undergoing cardiovascular evaluation in community practices were not evaluated more rapidly than those seen in the VA, though they were more likely to receive initial and repeat diagnostic testing. Adverse events were more common among community‐treated patients than those in the VA, suggesting an opportunity to optimize access to care while improving clinical outcomes.