Key result
Among patients eligible for a primary prevention ICD, NYHA Class II/III, male sex, age <75, and private health insurance were independently associated with higher rates of ICD implantation.
Why the study?
What factors influence the utilization of primary prevention ICDs in eligible patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction?
Observational (n=220)
No
What factors influence the utilization of primary prevention ICDs in eligible patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction?
Odds Ratio: 5.91 (95% CI 2.91–12.01)
Absolute Event Rate: 75.5% vs 40.2%
p-value: p=<0.001
In a contemporary urban tertiary care setting, primary prevention ICD utilization is independently associated with younger age, male sex, higher NYHA class, and private health insurance, highlighting potential disparities in guideline-directed device therapy.
May indicate disparities in primary prevention ICD access by sex, age, and insurance; leaves open equity-focused interventions.
BACKGROUND: A growing literature suggests underutilization of the primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD); thus, factors influencing utilization need to be understood. We performed a comprehensive assessment of patient characteristics and health insurance status among subjects eligible for primary prevention ICD in a tertiary care center. METHODS: From among a group of patients who met criteria for primary prevention ICD based on left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF ≤ 35%), ICD recipients (n = 110) were compared to ICD non-recipients (n = 110) to identify determinants of ICD implantation. We evaluated demographics, clinical profile including Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI, categorized as low (≤3) or high (>3)] and health insurance status. RESULTS: ICD recipients were younger (62.1±15.0 vs. 68.0±18.2; P = 0.01), with more males (80% vs. 65.5%; P = 0.01), higher NYHA class (II/III: 75.5% vs. 40.2%; P<0.001) and more likely to have supplemental private health insurance (61.8% vs. 46.4%; P = 0.02). CCI was not significantly different between the two groups (low CCI 61.8% vs. 62.7%; P = 0.89). In multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with ICD implantation were male sex (OR, 2.77, [1.31-5.85]; P = 0.01), age<75 (OR, 2.68, [1.30-5.50]; P = 0.01), private insurance (OR, 2.17, [1.08-4.36], P = 0.03) and NYHA Class II/III (OR, 5.91, [2.91-12.01]; P<0.001). Documentation of discussion about primary prevention ICD was absent in the majority (57.2%) of non-recipients. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary urban tertiary care setting, age, sex and heart failure symptom class were associated with ICD utilization, with socioeconomic/insurance status also potentially playing a role. These findings have implications for optimizing appropriate utilization of the prophylactic ICD and warrant follow-up in larger, more diverse populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Severe left ventricular dysfunction (n=220). NYHA Class II/III, male sex, age <75, and private insurance vs. Patients without these characteristics was evaluated on ICD implantation (NYHA Class II/III vs Class I) (OR 5.91, 95% CI 2.91-12.01, p=<0.001). Among patients eligible for a primary prevention ICD, NYHA Class II/III, male sex, age <75, and private health insurance were independently associated with higher rates of ICD implantation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: