Treatment Differences by Health Insurance Among Outpatients With Coronary Artery Disease

Objectives To compare treatment rates by insurance status for 5 quality-of-care indicators for coronary artery disease (CAD) care related to medication treatment. Method Within the NCDR's PINNACLE Registry, we identified 60,814 outpatients with CAD from 30 U.S. practices. Hierarchical modified Poisson regression models with practice site as a random effect were used to study the association between health insurance (no insurance, public or private health insurance) and 5 CAD quality measures. Results Of 60,814 patients, 5716 (9.4%) patients were uninsured and 11,962 (19.7%) had public insurance, whereas 43,136 (70.9%) were privately insured. After accounting for exclusions, uninsured patients with CAD were 9%, 12%, and 6% less likely to receive treatment with beta-blocker, ACE-I/ARB, and lipid lowering therapy, respectively, than privately insured patients, whereas patients with public insurance were 9% less likely to be prescribed ACE-I/ARB therapy. Most differences by insurance status were attenuated after adjusting for the site providing care. For example, whereas uninsured patients with left ventricular dysfunction and CAD were less likely to receive ACE-I/ARB therapy (unadjusted RR=0.88; 95% CI 0.84-0.93), this difference was eliminated after adjustment for site (adjusted RR=0.95; 95% CI 0.88-1.03; P=0.18). Conclusions Within this national outpatient cardiac registry, uninsured patients were less likely to receive evidence-based medications for CAD. These disparities were explained by the site providing care. Efforts to reduce treatment differences by insurance status among cardiac outpatients may additionally need to focus on improving rates of evidence-based treatment at sites with high proportions of uninsured patients.