Browsing by Author "Peterson, Eric D"
Now showing 1 - 20 of 67
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access A risk score for in-hospital death in patients admitted with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2013-01-28) Smith, Eric E; Shobha, Nandavar; Dai, David; Olson, DaiWai M; Reeves, Mathew J; Saver, Jeffrey L; Hernandez, Adrian F; Peterson, Eric D; Fonarow, Gregg C; Schwamm, Lee HBACKGROUND: We aimed to derive and validate a single risk score for predicting death from ischemic stroke (IS), intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 333 865 stroke patients (IS, 82.4%; ICH, 11.2%; SAH, 2.6%; uncertain type, 3.8%) in the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke database were used. In-hospital mortality varied greatly according to stroke type (IS, 5.5%; ICH, 27.2%; SAH, 25.1%; unknown type, 6.0%; P<0.001). The patients were randomly divided into derivation (60%) and validation (40%) samples. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent predictors of mortality and to assign point scores for a prediction model in the overall population and in the subset with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) recorded (37.1%). The c statistic, a measure of how well the models discriminate the risk of death, was 0.78 in the overall validation sample and 0.86 in the model including NIHSS. The model with NIHSS performed nearly as well in each stroke type as in the overall model including all types (c statistics for IS alone, 0.85; for ICH alone, 0.83; for SAH alone, 0.83; uncertain type alone, 0.86). The calibration of the model was excellent, as demonstrated by plots of observed versus predicted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A single prediction score for all stroke types can be used to predict risk of in-hospital death following stroke admission. Incorporation of NIHSS information substantially improves this predictive accuracy.Item Open Access Acquisition, Analysis, and Sharing of Data in 2015 and Beyond: A Survey of the Landscape: A Conference Report From the American Heart Association Data Summit 2015.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-11-05) Antman, Elliott M; Benjamin, Emelia J; Harrington, Robert A; Houser, Steven R; Peterson, Eric D; Bauman, Mary Ann; Brown, Nancy; Bufalino, Vincent; Califf, Robert M; Creager, Mark A; Daugherty, Alan; Demets, David L; Dennis, Bernard P; Ebadollahi, Shahram; Jessup, Mariell; Lauer, Michael S; Lo, Bernard; MacRae, Calum A; McConnell, Michael V; McCray, Alexa T; Mello, Michelle M; Mueller, Eric; Newburger, Jane W; Okun, Sally; Packer, Milton; Philippakis, Anthony; Ping, Peipei; Prasoon, Prad; Roger, Véronique L; Singer, Steve; Temple, Robert; Turner, Melanie B; Vigilante, Kevin; Warner, John; Wayte, Patrick; American Heart Association Data Sharing Summit AttendeesBACKGROUND: A 1.5-day interactive forum was convened to discuss critical issues in the acquisition, analysis, and sharing of data in the field of cardiovascular and stroke science. The discussion will serve as the foundation for the American Heart Association's (AHA's) near-term and future strategies in the Big Data area. The concepts evolving from this forum may also inform other fields of medicine and science. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 47 participants representing stakeholders from 7 domains (patients, basic scientists, clinical investigators, population researchers, clinicians and healthcare system administrators, industry, and regulatory authorities) participated in the conference. Presentation topics included updates on data as viewed from conventional medical and nonmedical sources, building and using Big Data repositories, articulation of the goals of data sharing, and principles of responsible data sharing. Facilitated breakout sessions were conducted to examine what each of the 7 stakeholder domains wants from Big Data under ideal circumstances and the possible roles that the AHA might play in meeting their needs. Important areas that are high priorities for further study regarding Big Data include a description of the methodology of how to acquire and analyze findings, validation of the veracity of discoveries from such research, and integration into investigative and clinical care aspects of future cardiovascular and stroke medicine. Potential roles that the AHA might consider include facilitating a standards discussion (eg, tools, methodology, and appropriate data use), providing education (eg, healthcare providers, patients, investigators), and helping build an interoperable digital ecosystem in cardiovascular and stroke science. CONCLUSION: There was a consensus across stakeholder domains that Big Data holds great promise for revolutionizing the way cardiovascular and stroke research is conducted and clinical care is delivered; however, there is a clear need for the creation of a vision of how to use it to achieve the desired goals. Potential roles for the AHA center around facilitating a discussion of standards, providing education, and helping establish a cardiovascular digital ecosystem. This ecosystem should be interoperable and needs to interface with the rapidly growing digital object environment of the modern-day healthcare system.Item Open Access Addressing barriers to optimal oral anticoagulation use and persistence among patients with atrial fibrillation: Proceedings, Washington, DC, December 3-4, 2012.(American heart journal, 2014-09) Hess, Paul L; Mirro, Michael J; Diener, Hans-Christoph; Eikelboom, John W; Al-Khatib, Sana M; Hylek, Elaine M; Bosworth, Hayden B; Gersh, Bernard J; Singer, Daniel E; Flaker, Greg; Mega, Jessica L; Peterson, Eric D; Rumsfeld, John S; Steinberg, Benjamin A; Kakkar, Ajay K; Califf, Robert M; Granger, Christopher B; Atrial Fibrillation Think-Tank ParticipantsApproximately half of patients with atrial fibrillation and with risk factors for stroke are not treated with oral anticoagulation (OAC), whether it be with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or novel OACs (NOACs); and of those treated, many discontinue treatment. Leaders from academia, government, industry, and professional societies convened in Washington, DC, on December 3-4, 2012, to identify barriers to optimal OAC use and adherence and to generate potential solutions. Participants identified a broad range of barriers, including knowledge gaps about stroke risk and the relative risks and benefits of anticoagulant therapies; lack of awareness regarding the potential use of NOAC agents for VKA-unsuitable patients; lack of recognition of expanded eligibility for OAC; lack of availability of reversal agents and the difficulty of anticoagulant effect monitoring for the NOACs; concerns with the bleeding risk of anticoagulant therapy, especially with the NOACs and particularly in the setting of dual antiplatelet therapy; suboptimal time in therapeutic range for VKA; and costs and insurance coverage. Proposed solutions were to define reasons for oral anticoagulant underuse classified in ways that can guide intervention and improve use, to increase awareness of stroke risk as well as the benefits and risks of OAC use via educational initiatives and feedback mechanisms, to better define the role of VKA in the current therapeutic era including eligibility and ineligibility for different anticoagulant therapies, to identify NOAC reversal agents and monitoring strategies and make knowledge regarding their use publicly available, to minimize the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy and concomitant OAC where possible, to improve time in therapeutic range for VKA, to leverage observational data sets to refine understanding of OAC use and outcomes in general practice, and to better align health system incentives.Item Open Access An Initial Evaluation of the Impact of Pokémon GO on Physical Activity.(Journal of the American Heart Association, 2017-05-16) Xian, Ying; Xu, Hanzhang; Xu, Haolin; Liang, Li; Hernandez, Adrian F; Wang, Tracy Y; Peterson, Eric DPokémon GO is a location-based augmented reality game. Using GPS and the camera on a smartphone, the game requires players to travel in real world to capture animated creatures, called Pokémon. We examined the impact of Pokémon GO on physical activity (PA).A pre-post observational study of 167 Pokémon GO players who were self-enrolled through recruitment flyers or online social media was performed. Participants were instructed to provide screenshots of their step counts recorded by the iPhone Health app between June 15 and July 31, 2016, which was 3 weeks before and 3 weeks after the Pokémon GO release date. Of 167 participants, the median age was 25 years (interquartile range, 21-29 years). The daily average steps of participants at baseline was 5678 (SD, 2833; median, 5718 [interquartile range, 3675-7279]). After initiation of Pokémon GO, daily activity rose to 7654 steps (SD, 3616; median, 7232 [interquartile range, 5041-9744], pre-post change: 1976; 95% CI, 1494-2458, or a 34.8% relative increase [P<0.001]). On average, 10 000 "XP" points (a measure of game progression) was associated with 2134 additional steps per day (95% CI, 1673-2595), suggesting a potential dose-response relationship. The number of participants achieving a goal of 10 000+ steps per day increased from 15.3% before to 27.5% after (odds ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.70-2.50). Increased PA was also observed in subgroups, with the largest increases seen in participants who spent more time playing Pokémon GO, those who were overweight/obese, or those with a lower baseline PA level.Pokémon GO participation was associated with a significant increase in PA among young adults. Incorporating PA into gameplay may provide an alternative way to promote PA in persons who are attracted to the game.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02888314.Item Open Access Assessment of the quality of existing patient educational tools focused on sudden cardiac arrest: a systematic evaluation by the Sudden Cardiac Arrest Thought Leadership Alliance.(Patient Prefer Adherence, 2013) Hazelton, Garrett; Al-Khatib, Sana M; Fonarow, Gregg C; Thomas, Kevin L; Hayes, David; Sanders, Gillian D; Campbell, Susan M; Yancy, Clyde; Peterson, Eric D; Sears, SamuelBACKGROUND: Conveying contemporary treatment options for those at risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is challenging. The purpose of the present research was to evaluate the quality and usability of available patient educational tools relevant to SCA and its treatment options, such as implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). We hypothesized that this review would identify gaps in areas of information for the enhancement of patient education and decision-making materials. METHODS: We used a formal instrument to assess specific domains of content, development, and effectiveness of 18 available SCA and ICD educational tools. The multidisciplinary review panel included two electrophysiologists, two general cardiologists, a cardiac psychologist, a health services researcher, and a patient advocate. RESULTS: Of the 18 education tools, four were rated as "good, may need revisions, but sufficient for use", 12 were rated as "marginal, needs revision prior to use", and two were rated as "poor, inadequate for use". None of the tools were rated as being of "very good" or "excellent" quality. CONCLUSION: There appear to be opportunities to improve the quality and completeness of existing educational tools for patients with SCA and ICD. While many tools have been developed, they fall below current standards for supporting informed medical decision-making.Item Open Access Association Between Comorbidities and Outcomes in Heart Failure Patients With and Without an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-08-06) Khazanie, Prateeti; Hellkamp, Anne S; Fonarow, Gregg C; Bhatt, Deepak L; Masoudi, Frederick A; Anstrom, Kevin J; Heidenreich, Paul A; Yancy, Clyde W; Curtis, Lesley H; Hernandez, Adrian F; Peterson, Eric D; Al-Khatib, Sana MBACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF), but whether this association holds among older patients with multiple comorbid illnesses and worse HF burden remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry and the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry linked with Medicare claims, we examined outcomes associated with primary-prevention ICD versus no ICD among HF patients aged ≥65 years in clinical practice. We included patients with an ejection fraction ≤35% who received (ICD Registry) and who did not receive (GWTG-HF) an ICD. Compared with patients with an ICD, patients in the non-ICD group were older and more likely to be female and white. In matched cohorts, the 3-year adjusted mortality rate was lower in the ICD group versus the non-ICD group (46.7% versus 55.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.83). There was no associated difference in all-cause readmission (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.08) but a lower risk of HF readmission (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.97). When compared with no ICD, ICDs were also associated with better survival in patients with ≤3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87) and >3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and in patients with no hospitalization for HF (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.86) and at least 1 prior HF hospitalization (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82). In subgroup analyses, there were no interactions between ICD and mortality risk for comorbidity burden (P=0.95) and for prior HF hospitalization (P=0.46). CONCLUSION: Among older HF patients, ICDs for primary prevention were associated with lower risk of mortality even among those with high comorbid illness burden and prior HF hospitalization.Item Open Access Association between stroke center hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke and mortality.(JAMA, 2011-01) Xian, Ying; Holloway, Robert G; Chan, Paul S; Noyes, Katia; Shah, Manish N; Ting, Henry H; Chappel, Andre R; Peterson, Eric D; Friedman, BruceAlthough stroke centers are widely accepted and supported, little is known about their effect on patient outcomes.To examine the association between admission to stroke centers for acute ischemic stroke and mortality.Observational study using data from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. We compared mortality for patients admitted with acute ischemic stroke (n = 30,947) between 2005 and 2006 at designated stroke centers and nondesignated hospitals using differential distance to hospitals as an instrumental variable to adjust for potential prehospital selection bias. Patients were followed up for mortality for 1 year after the index hospitalization through 2007. To assess whether our findings were specific to stroke, we also compared mortality for patients admitted with gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n = 39,409) or acute myocardial infarction (n = 40,024) at designated stroke centers and nondesignated hospitals.Thirty-day all-cause mortality.Among 30,947 patients with acute ischemic stroke, 15,297 (49.4%) were admitted to designated stroke centers. Using the instrumental variable analysis, admission to designated stroke centers was associated with lower 30-day all-cause mortality (10.1% vs 12.5%; adjusted mortality difference, -2.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.6% to -1.4%; P < .001) and greater use of thrombolytic therapy (4.8% vs 1.7%; adjusted difference, 2.2%; 95% CI, 1.6% to 2.8%; P < .001). Differences in mortality also were observed at 1-day, 7-day, and 1-year follow-up. The outcome differences were specific for stroke, as stroke centers and nondesignated hospitals had similar 30-day all-cause mortality rates among those with gastrointestinal hemorrhage (5.0% vs 5.8%; adjusted mortality difference, +0.3%; 95% CI, -0.5% to 1.0%; P = .50) or acute myocardial infarction (10.5% vs 12.7%; adjusted mortality difference, +0.1%; 95% CI, -0.9% to 1.1%; P = .83).Among patients with acute ischemic stroke, admission to a designated stroke center was associated with modestly lower mortality and more frequent use of thrombolytic therapy.Item Open Access Association Between Time to Treatment With Endovascular Reperfusion Therapy and Outcomes in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated in Clinical Practice.(JAMA, 2019-07) Jahan, Reza; Saver, Jeffrey L; Schwamm, Lee H; Fonarow, Gregg C; Liang, Li; Matsouaka, Roland A; Xian, Ying; Holmes, DaJuanicia N; Peterson, Eric D; Yavagal, Dileep; Smith, Eric EImportance:Randomized clinical trials suggest benefit of endovascular-reperfusion therapy for large vessel occlusion in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is time dependent, but the extent to which it influences outcome and generalizability to routine clinical practice remains uncertain. Objective:To characterize the association of speed of treatment with outcome among patients with AIS undergoing endovascular-reperfusion therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants:Retrospective cohort study using data prospectively collected from January 2015 to December 2016 in the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke nationwide US quality registry, with final follow-up through April 15, 2017. Participants were 6756 patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion AIS treated with endovascular-reperfusion therapy with onset-to-puncture time of 8 hours or less. Exposures:Onset (last-known well time) to arterial puncture, and hospital arrival to arterial puncture (door-to-puncture time). Main Outcomes and Measures:Substantial reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b-3), ambulatory status, global disability (modified Rankin Scale [mRS]) and destination at discharge, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and in-hospital mortality/hospice discharge. Results:Among 6756 patients, the mean (SD) age was 69.5 (14.8) years, 51.2% (3460/6756) were women, and median pretreatment score on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 17 (IQR, 12-22). Median onset-to-puncture time was 230 minutes (IQR, 170-305) and median door-to-puncture time was 87 minutes (IQR, 62-116), with substantial reperfusion in 85.9% (5433/6324) of patients. Adverse events were sICH in 6.7% (449/6693) of patients and in-hospital mortality/hospice discharge in 19.6% (1326/6756) of patients. At discharge, 36.9% (2132/5783) ambulated independently and 23.0% (1225/5334) had functional independence (mRS 0-2). In onset-to-puncture adjusted analysis, time-outcome relationships were nonlinear with steeper slopes between 30 to 270 minutes than 271 to 480 minutes. In the 30- to 270-minute time frame, faster onset to puncture in 15-minute increments was associated with higher likelihood of achieving independent ambulation at discharge (absolute increase, 1.14% [95% CI, 0.75%-1.53%]), lower in-hospital mortality/hospice discharge (absolute decrease, -0.77% [95% CI, -1.07% to -0.47%]), and lower risk of sICH (absolute decrease, -0.22% [95% CI, -0.40% to -0.03%]). Faster door-to-puncture times were similarly associated with improved outcomes, including in the 30- to 120-minute window, higher likelihood of achieving discharge to home (absolute increase, 2.13% [95% CI, 0.81%-3.44%]) and lower in-hospital mortality/hospice discharge (absolute decrease, -1.48% [95% CI, -2.60% to -0.36%]) for each 15-minute increment. Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients with AIS due to large vessel occlusion treated in routine clinical practice, shorter time to endovascular-reperfusion therapy was significantly associated with better outcomes. These findings support efforts to reduce time to hospital and endovascular treatment in patients with stroke.Item Open Access Association of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Among Patients Taking Non-Vitamin K Antagonist vs Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants With In-Hospital Mortality.(JAMA, 2018-02) Inohara, Taku; Xian, Ying; Liang, Li; Matsouaka, Roland A; Saver, Jeffrey L; Smith, Eric E; Schwamm, Lee H; Reeves, Mathew J; Hernandez, Adrian F; Bhatt, Deepak L; Peterson, Eric D; Fonarow, Gregg CAlthough non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are increasingly used to prevent thromboembolic disease, there are limited data on NOAC-related intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).To assess the association between preceding oral anticoagulant use (warfarin, NOACs, and no oral anticoagulants [OACs]) and in-hospital mortality among patients with ICH.Retrospective cohort study of 141 311 patients with ICH admitted from October 2013 to December 2016 to 1662 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals.Anticoagulation therapy before ICH, defined as any use of OACs within 7 days prior to hospital arrival.In-hospital mortality.Among 141 311 patients with ICH (mean [SD] age, 68.3 [15.3] years; 48.1% women), 15 036 (10.6%) were taking warfarin and 4918 (3.5%) were taking NOACs preceding ICH, and 39 585 (28.0%) and 5783 (4.1%) were taking concomitant single and dual antiplatelet agents, respectively. Patients with prior use of warfarin or NOACs were older and had higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and prior stroke. Acute ICH stroke severity (measured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale) was not significantly different across the 3 groups (median, 9 [interquartile range, 2-21] for warfarin, 8 [2-20] for NOACs, and 8 [2-19] for no OACs). The unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates were 32.6% for warfarin, 26.5% for NOACs, and 22.5% for no OACs. Compared with patients without prior use of OACs, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher among patients with prior use of warfarin (adjusted risk difference [ARD], 9.0% [97.5% CI, 7.9% to 10.1%]; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.62 [97.5% CI, 1.53 to 1.71]) and higher among patients with prior use of NOACs (ARD, 3.3% [97.5% CI, 1.7% to 4.8%]; AOR, 1.21 [97.5% CI, 1.11-1.32]). Compared with patients with prior use of warfarin, patients with prior use of NOACs had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (ARD, -5.7% [97.5% CI, -7.3% to -4.2%]; AOR, 0.75 [97.5% CI, 0.69 to 0.81]). The difference in mortality between NOAC-treated patients and warfarin-treated patients was numerically greater among patients with prior use of dual antiplatelet agents (32.7% vs 47.1%; ARD, -15.0% [95.5% CI, -26.3% to -3.8%]; AOR, 0.50 [97.5% CI, 0.29 to 0.86]) than among those taking these agents without prior antiplatelet therapy (26.4% vs 31.7%; ARD, -5.0% [97.5% CI, -6.8% to -3.2%]; AOR, 0.77 [97.5% CI, 0.70 to 0.85]), although the interaction P value (.07) was not statistically significant.Among patients with ICH, prior use of NOACs or warfarin was associated with higher in-hospital mortality compared with no OACs. Prior use of NOACs, compared with prior use of warfarin, was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality.Item Unknown Association of Preceding Antithrombotic Treatment With Acute Ischemic Stroke Severity and In-Hospital Outcomes Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.(JAMA, 2017-03) Xian, Ying; O'Brien, Emily C; Liang, Li; Xu, Haolin; Schwamm, Lee H; Fonarow, Gregg C; Bhatt, Deepak L; Smith, Eric E; Olson, DaiWai M; Maisch, Lesley; Hannah, Deidre; Lindholm, Brianna; Lytle, Barbara L; Pencina, Michael J; Hernandez, Adrian F; Peterson, Eric DImportance:Antithrombotic therapies are known to prevent stroke for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) but are often underused in community practice. Objectives:To examine the prevalence of patients with acute ischemic stroke with known history of AF who were not receiving guideline-recommended antithrombotic treatment before stroke and to determine the association of preceding antithrombotic therapy with stroke severity and in-hospital outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants:Retrospective observational study of 94 474 patients with acute ischemic stroke and known history of AF admitted from October 2012 through March 2015 to 1622 hospitals participating in the Get With the Guidelines-Stroke program. Exposures:Antithrombotic therapy before stroke. Main Outcomes and Measures:Stroke severity as measured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS; range of 0-42, with a higher score indicating greater stroke severity and a score ≥16 indicating moderate or severe stroke), and in-hospital mortality. Results:Of 94 474 patients (mean [SD] age, 79.9 [11.0] years; 57.0% women), 7176 (7.6%) were receiving therapeutic warfarin (international normalized ratio [INR] ≥2) and 8290 (8.8%) were receiving non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) preceding the stroke. A total of 79 008 patients (83.6%) were not receiving therapeutic anticoagulation; 12 751 (13.5%) had subtherapeutic warfarin anticoagulation (INR <2) at the time of stroke, 37 674 (39.9%) were receiving antiplatelet therapy only, and 28 583 (30.3%) were not receiving any antithrombotic treatment. Among 91 155 high-risk patients (prestroke CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2), 76 071 (83.5%) were not receiving therapeutic warfarin or NOACs before stroke. The unadjusted rates of moderate or severe stroke were lower among patients receiving therapeutic warfarin (15.8% [95% CI, 14.8%-16.7%]) and NOACs (17.5% [95% CI, 16.6%-18.4%]) than among those receiving no antithrombotic therapy (27.1% [95% CI, 26.6%-27.7%]), antiplatelet therapy only (24.8% [95% CI, 24.3%-25.3%]), or subtherapeutic warfarin (25.8% [95% CI, 25.0%-26.6%]); unadjusted rates of in-hospital mortality also were lower for those receiving therapeutic warfarin (6.4% [95% CI, 5.8%-7.0%]) and NOACs (6.3% [95% CI, 5.7%-6.8%]) compared with those receiving no antithrombotic therapy (9.3% [95% CI, 8.9%-9.6%]), antiplatelet therapy only (8.1% [95% CI, 7.8%-8.3%]), or subtherapeutic warfarin (8.8% [95% CI, 8.3%-9.3%]). After adjusting for potential confounders, compared with no antithrombotic treatment, preceding use of therapeutic warfarin, NOACs, or antiplatelet therapy was associated with lower odds of moderate or severe stroke (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.56 [0.51-0.60], 0.65 [0.61-0.71], and 0.88 [0.84-0.92], respectively) and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.75 [0.67-0.85], 0.79 [0.72-0.88], and 0.83 [0.78-0.88], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients with atrial fibrillation who had experienced an acute ischemic stroke, inadequate therapeutic anticoagulation preceding the stroke was prevalent. Therapeutic anticoagulation was associated with lower odds of moderate or severe stroke and lower odds of in-hospital mortality.Item Unknown Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in U.S. Community Practice--Results From Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF).(J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-05-21) Holmqvist, Fredrik; Simon, DaJuanicia; Steinberg, Benjamin A; Hong, Seok Jae; Kowey, Peter R; Reiffel, James A; Naccarelli, Gerald V; Chang, Paul; Gersh, Bernard J; Peterson, Eric D; Piccini, Jonathan P; ORBIT‐AF InvestigatorsBACKGROUND: The characteristics of patients undergoing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and subsequent outcomes in community practice are not well described. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), we investigated the prevalence and impact of catheter ablation of AF. Among 9935 patients enrolled, 5.3% had previous AF ablation. Patients with AF ablation were significantly younger, more frequently male, and had less anemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and previous myocardial infarction (P<0.05 for all analyses) than those without previous catheter ablation of AF. Ablated patients were more likely to have a family history of AF, obstructive sleep apnea, paroxysmal AF, and moderate-to-severe symptoms (P<0.0001 for all analyses). Patients with previous ablation were more often in sinus rhythm on entry into the registry (52% vs. 32%; P<0.0001). Despite previous ablation, 46% in the ablation group were still on antiarrhythmic therapy. Oral anticoagulation was prescribed in 75% of those with previous ablation versus 76% in those without previous ablation (P=0.5). The adjusted risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 1.18; P=0.2) and cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26; P=0.5) were similar in both groups. Patients with incident AF ablation had higher risk of subsequent CV hospitalization than matched patients without incident ablation (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.26; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: In U.S. clinical practice, a minority of patients with AF are managed with catheter ablation. Subsequent to ablation, there were no significant differences in oral anticoagulation use or outcomes, including stroke/non-central nervous system embolism/transient ischemic attack or death. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01165710.Item Unknown Clinical Characteristics, Oral Anticoagulation Patterns, and Outcomes of Medicaid Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF I) Registry.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2016-05-04) O'Brien, Emily C; Kim, Sunghee; Thomas, Laine; Fonarow, Gregg C; Kowey, Peter R; Mahaffey, Kenneth W; Gersh, Bernard J; Piccini, Jonathan P; Peterson, Eric DBACKGROUND: Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance.Item Unknown Clinical Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Warfarin in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Stroke: Findings From the Patient-Centered Research Into Outcomes Stroke Patients Prefer and Effectiveness Research (PROSPER) Study.(JAMA neurology, 2019-07-22) Xian, Ying; Xu, Haolin; O'Brien, Emily C; Shah, Shreyansh; Thomas, Laine; Pencina, Michael J; Fonarow, Gregg C; Olson, DaiWai M; Schwamm, Lee H; Bhatt, Deepak L; Smith, Eric E; Hannah, Deidre; Maisch, Lesley; Lytle, Barbara L; Peterson, Eric D; Hernandez, Adrian FImportance:Current guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at high risk. Despite demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials, real-world data of DOACs vs warfarin for secondary prevention in patients with ischemic stroke are largely based on administrative claims or have not focused on patient-centered outcomes. Objective:To examine the clinical effectiveness of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban) vs warfarin after ischemic stroke in patients with AF. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study included patients who were 65 years or older, had AF, were anticoagulation naive, and were discharged from 1041 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke-associated hospitals for acute ischemic stroke between October 2011 and December 2014. Data were linked to Medicare claims for long-term outcomes (up to December 2015). Analyses were completed in July 2018. Exposures:DOACs vs warfarin prescription at discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcomes were home time, a patient-centered measure defined as the total number of days free from death and institutional care after discharge, and major adverse cardiovascular events. A propensity score-overlap weighting method was used to account for differences in observed characteristics between groups. Results:Of 11 662 survivors of acute ischemic stroke (median [interquartile range] age, 80 [74-86] years), 4041 (34.7%) were discharged with DOACs and 7621 with warfarin. Except for National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores (median [interquartile range], 4 [1-9] vs 5 [2-11]), baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Patients discharged with DOACs (vs warfarin) had more days at home (mean [SD], 287.2 [114.7] vs 263.0 [127.3] days; adjusted difference, 15.6 [99% CI, 9.0-22.1] days) during the first year postdischarge and were less likely to experience major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.89 [99% CI, 0.83-0.96]). Also, in patients receiving DOACs, there were fewer deaths (aHR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.82-0.95]; P < .001), all-cause readmissions (aHR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]; P = .003), cardiovascular readmissions (aHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86-0.99]; P = .02), hemorrhagic strokes (aHR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.50-0.95]; P = .02), and hospitalizations with bleeding (aHR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.97]; P = .009) but a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (aHR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.01-1.30]; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance:In patients with acute ischemic stroke and AF, DOAC use at discharge was associated with better long-term outcomes relative to warfarin.Item Unknown Comparing Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting and Instrumental Variable Methods for the Evaluation of Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.(JAMA cardiology, 2016-09) Federspiel, Jerome J; Anstrom, Kevin J; Xian, Ying; McCoy, Lisa A; Effron, Mark B; Faries, Douglas E; Zettler, Marjorie; Mauri, Laura; Yeh, Robert W; Peterson, Eric D; Wang, Tracy Y; Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors–Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) InvestigatorsIMPORTANCE:There is increasing interest in performing comparative effectiveness analyses in large observational databases, yet these analyses must adjust for treatment selection issues. OBJECTIVES:To conduct comparative safety and efficacy analyses of prasugrel vs clopidogrel bisulfate after percutaneous coronary intervention and to evaluate inverse probability of treatment weighting (a propensity score method) and instrumental variable methods. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This study used data from the Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors-Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study. Included in the study were patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction, 26.0% of whom received prasugrel. The study dates were April 4, 2010, to October 31, 2012. EXPOSURES:Choice of initial antiplatelet agent (prasugrel or clopidogrel). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Safety and efficacy outcomes included 1-year composite major adverse cardiovascular events, moderate to severe bleeding, and stent thrombosis. Hospitalizations for pneumonia, bone fractures, and planned percutaneous coronary intervention were used as the falsification end points. RESULTS:The study cohort comprised 11 784 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [11.6] years, and 28.0% were female). Using inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment, prasugrel and clopidogrel had similar major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83-1.16) and bleeding outcomes (1.18; 0.77-1.80), but prasugrel had a lower rate of stent thrombosis (0.51; 0.31-0.85). Using instrumental variable methods, prasugrel use was associated with a lower rate of the major adverse cardiovascular event end point (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00) but nonsignificant differences in the rates of bleeding (0.95; 0.41-2.08) and stent thrombosis (0.67; 0.16-2.00). There was no significant treatment difference noted in any of the falsification end-point rates when analyses were performed using inverse probability of treatment weighting, although the bone fracture end point approached statistical significance. Nevertheless, a lower rate of pneumonia-related hospitalizations was noted in the prasugrel-treated patients when analyses were performed using instrumental variable methods. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Conclusions regarding the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy varied depending on analytic technique, and none were concordant with the results from randomized trials. In addition, both statistical strategies demonstrated concerning associations when tested in the falsification analyses. A high level of scrutiny and careful attention to assumptions and validity are required when interpreting complex analyses of observational data.Item Unknown Comparison of performance achievement award recognition with primary stroke center certification for acute ischemic stroke care.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2013-10-14) Fonarow, Gregg C; Liang, Li; Smith, Eric E; Reeves, Mathew J; Saver, Jeffrey L; Xian, Ying; Hernandez, Adrian F; Peterson, Eric D; Schwamm, Lee H; GWTG-Stroke Steering Committee & InvestigatorsBACKGROUND: Hospital certification and recognition programs represent 2 independent but commonly used systems to distinguish hospitals, yet they have not been directly compared. This study assessed acute ischemic stroke quality of care measure conformity by hospitals receiving Primary Stroke Center (PSC) certification and those receiving the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) Performance Achievement Award (PAA) recognition. METHODS AND RESULTS: The patient and hospital characteristics as well as performance/quality measures for acute ischemic stroke from 1356 hospitals participating in the GWTG-Stroke Program 2010-2012 were compared. Hospitals were classified as PAA+/PSC+ (hospitals n = 410, patients n = 169,302), PAA+/PSC- (n = 415, n = 129,454), PAA-/PSC+ (n = 88, n = 26,386), and PAA-/PSC- (n = 443, n = 75,565). A comprehensive set of stroke measures were compared with adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics. Patient characteristics were similar by PAA and PSC status but PAA-/PSC- hospitals were more likely to be smaller and nonteaching. Measure conformity was highest for PAA+/PSC+ and PAA+/PSC- hospitals, intermediate for PAA-/PSC+ hospitals, and lowest for PAA-/PSC- hospitals (all-or-none care measure 91.2%, 91.2%, 84.3%, and 76.9%, respectively). After adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, PAA+/PSC+, PAA+/PSC-, and PAA-/PSC+ hospitals had 3.15 (95% CIs 2.86 to 3.47); 3.23 (2.93 to 3.56) and 1.72 (1.47 to 2.00), higher odds for providing all indicated stroke performance measures to patients compared with PAA-/PSC- hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: While both PSC certification and GWTG-Stroke PAA recognition identified hospitals providing higher conformity with care measures for patients hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke, PAA recognition was a more robust identifier of hospitals with better performance.Item Unknown Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov.(N Engl J Med, 2015-03-12) Anderson, Monique L; Chiswell, Karen; Peterson, Eric D; Tasneem, Asba; Topping, James; Califf, Robert MBACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) mandates timely reporting of results of applicable clinical trials to ClinicalTrials.gov. We characterized the proportion of applicable clinical trials with publicly available results and determined independent factors associated with the reporting of results. METHODS: Using an algorithm based on input from the National Library of Medicine, we identified trials that were likely to be subject to FDAAA provisions (highly likely applicable clinical trials, or HLACTs) from 2008 through 2013. We determined the proportion of HLACTs that reported results within the 12-month interval mandated by the FDAAA or at any time during the 5-year study period. We used regression models to examine characteristics associated with reporting at 12 months and throughout the 5-year study period. RESULTS: From all the trials at ClinicalTrials.gov, we identified 13,327 HLACTs that were terminated or completed from January 1, 2008, through August 31, 2012. Of these trials, 77.4% were classified as drug trials. A total of 36.9% of the trials were phase 2 studies, and 23.4% were phase 3 studies; 65.6% were funded by industry. Only 13.4% of trials reported summary results within 12 months after trial completion, whereas 38.3% reported results at any time up to September 27, 2013. Timely reporting was independently associated with factors such as FDA oversight, a later trial phase, and industry funding. A sample review suggested that 45% of industry-funded trials were not required to report results, as compared with 6% of trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and 9% of trials that were funded by other government or academic institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite ethical and legal obligations to disclose findings promptly, most HLACTs did not report results to ClinicalTrials.gov in a timely fashion during the study period. Industry-funded trials adhered to legal obligations more often than did trials funded by the NIH or other government or academic institutions. (Funded by the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative and the NIH.).Item Unknown Contemporary trends and predictors of postacute service use and routine discharge home after stroke.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2015-02-23) Prvu Bettger, Janet; McCoy, Lisa; Smith, Eric E; Fonarow, Gregg C; Schwamm, Lee H; Peterson, Eric DBACKGROUND: Returning home after the hospital is a primary aim for healthcare; however, additional postacute care (PAC) services are sometimes necessary for returning stroke patients to their pre-event status. Recent trends in hospital discharge disposition specifying PAC use have not been examined across age groups or health insurance types. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined trends in discharge to inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), home with home health (HH), and home without services for 849 780 patients ≥18 years of age with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke at 1687 hospitals participating in Get With The Guidelines-Stroke. Multivariable analysis was used to identify factors associated with discharge to any PAC (IRF, SNF, or HH) versus discharge home without services. From 2003 to 2011, there was a 2.1% increase (unadjusted P=0.001) in PAC use after a stroke hospitalization. Change was greatest in SNF use, an 8.3% decrease over the period. IRF and HH increased 6.9% and 3.6%, respectively. The 2 strongest clinical predictors of PAC use after acute care were patients not ambulating on the second day of their hospital stay (ambulation odds ratio [OR], 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.86 to 3.23) and those who failed a dysphagia screen or had an order restricting oral intake (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 2.37 to 2.59). CONCLUSIONS: Four in 10 stroke patients are discharged home without services. Although little has changed overall in PAC use since 2003, further research is needed to explain the shift in service use by type and its effect on outcomes.Item Unknown Defining a Mobile Health Roadmap for Cardiovascular Health and Disease.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2016-07-12) Eapen, Zubin J; Turakhia, Mintu P; McConnell, Michael V; Graham, Garth; Dunn, Patrick; Tiner, Colby; Rich, Carlo; Harrington, Robert A; Peterson, Eric D; Wayte, PatrickItem Unknown Development and initial testing of the stroke rapid-treatment readiness tool.(J Neurosci Nurs, 2014-10) Olson, DaiWai M; Cox, Margueritte; Constable, Mark; Britz, Gavin W; Lin, Cheryl B; Zimmer, Louise O; Fonarow, Gregg C; Schwamm, Lee H; Peterson, Eric DNo instruments are currently available to help health systems identify target areas for reducing door-to-needle times for the administration of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator to eligible patients with ischemic stroke. A 67-item Likert-scale survey was administered by telephone to stroke personnel at 252 U.S. hospitals participating in the "Get With The Guidelines-Stroke" quality improvement program. Factor analysis was used to refine the instrument to a four-factor 29-item instrument that can be used by hospitals to assess their readiness to administer intravenous tissue plasminogen activator within 60 minutes of patient hospital arrival.Item Unknown Early adoption of dabigatran and its dosing in US patients with atrial fibrillation: results from the outcomes registry for better informed treatment of atrial fibrillation.(J Am Heart Assoc, 2013-11-25) Steinberg, Benjamin A; Holmes, Dajuanicia N; Piccini, Jonathan P; Ansell, Jack; Chang, Paul; Fonarow, Gregg C; Gersh, Bernard; Mahaffey, Kenneth W; Kowey, Peter R; Ezekowitz, Michael D; Singer, Daniel E; Thomas, Laine; Peterson, Eric D; Hylek, Elaine M; Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) Investigators and PatientsBACKGROUND: Dabigatran is a novel oral anticoagulant approved for thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation. Adoption patterns of this new agent in community practice are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied patterns of dabigatran use among patients enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) Registry between June 2010 and August 2011 and followed for 12 months. Among 9974 atrial fibrillation patients included, 1217 (12%) were treated with dabigatran during the study. Overall, patients receiving dabigatran were younger (median age 72 versus 75 years, P<0.0001), more likely to be white (92% versus 89%, P=0.005), more likely to have private insurance (33% versus 25%, P<0.0001), and less likely to have prior cardiovascular disease (4% versus 33%, P<0.0001). They had more new-onset atrial fibrillation (8.8% versus 4.1%, P<0.0001), lower CHADS2 scores (estimated risk based on the presence of congestive heart failure, hypertension, aged ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, and prior stroke or transient ischemic attack; mean 2.0 versus 2.3, P<0.0001), and lower Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation scores (mean 2.4 versus 2.8, P<0.0001). More than half (n=14/25, 56%) of patients with severe kidney disease were not prescribed reduced dosing, whereas 10% (n=91/920) with preserved renal function received lower dosing. Among patients not on dabigatran at baseline, 8% had dabigatran initiated during follow-up. Patient education was significantly associated with switching from warfarin to dabigatran (adjusted odds ratio for postgraduate 1.73, P=0.007), whereas antiarrhythmic drug use significantly correlated with de novo adoption of dabigatran (adjusted odds ratio 2.4, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving dabigatran were younger and at a lower risk of stroke and bleeding. Patients appeared to drive switching from warfarin, whereas clinical characteristics influenced de novo start of dabigatran. These data suggest cautious early uptake of dabigatran, and more careful attention to dosing adjustments is warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: Clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01165710.