Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease (Oct 2024)

Relationship Between Insurance Status and Receipt of Cardiac Tests and Procedures During Hospitalization: A Cross‐Sectional Study

  • Michael I. Ellenbogen,
  • Joseph E. Marine,
  • Armin Arbab‐Zadeh,
  • Chathurangi H. Pathiravasan,
  • Jenna Swann,
  • Daniel J. Brotman

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.124.035797
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 19

Abstract

Read online

Background Prior analyses of the relationship between insurance status and receipt of tests and procedures have yielded conflicting findings and have focused on outpatient care. We sought to characterize the relationship between primary payer and diagnostic and procedural intensity, comparing rates of cardiac tests and procedures in matched hospitalized Medicaid and commercially insured patients. Methods and Results We created a propensity score–matched sample of Medicaid and commercially insured adults hospitalized at all acute care hospitals in Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, and North Carolina from 2016 to 2018. The main outcome was receipt of a cardiac test or procedure: echocardiogram, stress test, cardiac catheterization (elective, in acute coronary syndrome, in ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction), and pacemaker and subcutaneous cardiac rhythm monitor implantation. Generalized linear models with a hospital‐specific indicator variable were estimated to calculate the adjusted odds of a commercially insured patient receiving a given test or procedure relative to a Medicaid patient. Models controlled for race, ethnicity, and zip code income quartile. Commercially insured patients were more likely to receive each cardiac test or procedure, with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.16 (95% CI, 1.00–1.34) for cardiac catheterization in ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction to 1.40 (95% CI, 1.27–1.54) for pacemaker implantation. Conclusions Hospitalized commercially insured patients were more likely to undergo a range of cardiac tests and procedures, some of which may represent low‐value care. This may be driven by a combination of physician and patient preference, financial incentives, and social determinants of health. Our findings support the need for hospital payment models focused on increasing value and reducing inequities.

Keywords