AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2641-0419/154
1Canadian Heart Research Centre
2St Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
3Université de Montréal, Institut de cardiologie de Montréal
4University of British Columbia
5Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary; Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
6Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
*Corresponding Author: Anatoly Langer, Canadian Heart Research Centre
Citation: Anatoly Langer, Shaun G. Goodman, G. B. John Mancini, Mary Tan, Jean Grégoire., et al (2021) Is Treatment Inertia Unique to Publicly Funded Healthcare? Insights from the Guidelines Oriented Approach to Lipid lowering (GOAL) Canada Program. J. Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 4(7); Doi:10.31579/2641-0419/154
Copyright: © 2021 Anatoly Langer, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 22 March 2021 | Accepted: 01 April 2021 | Published: 08 April 2021
Keywords: cardiovascular disease; familial hypercholesterolemia; cardiovascular medications
Background: We compared the use of lipid lowering therapy, low density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, and proportion achieving guideline-recommended LDL-C levels in patients with private vs. public insurance coverage for their lipid lowering treatment.
Materials and Methods: Guidelines Oriented Approach to Lipid lowering (GOAL) Canada enrolled 2009 patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and an LDL-C above the guideline-recommended target of <2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During two follow-up visits physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations.
Results: Of 2009 patients enrolled (median age 63 years, 42% female), there were 1284 (64%) patients with private and 725 (36%) with public insurance for lipid lowering therapy. Patients with private insurance were younger and less likely to have a history of heart failure or to be on bile acid sequestrants. There was no difference between the groups in their lipid levels or lipid lowering therapy at baseline. During the follow up, there was no difference in the use of ezetimibe; however, the use of PCSK9i was more frequent in patients with private insurance (31.7 % vs. 21%, p<0.0001), the mean LDL-C level was slightly lower (2.11±1.17 vs. 2.31±1.17 mmol/L, p = 0.001), and the proportion of patients achieving the guideline-recommended LDL-C level was greater (54% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.001). After adjustment for other factors in a multivariable model, private insurance was not a significant predictor of achieving the guideline-recommended LDL-C level in a multivariable model.
Conclusion: While PCSK9i use was higher in patients with private insurance, the majority of patients with either private or public insurance experienced similar treatment inertia. The cost of non-generic medications does not appear to be the dominant reason for the continued care gap in lipid lowering of high-risk patients.
Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and there is considerable evidence that lowering LDL-C reduces CVD morbidity and mortality. [1] Canadian Cardiovascular Society dyslipidemia guidelines [2] recommend initiation of LDL-C lowering with high intensity statin therapy with the addition of ezetimibe and / or PCSK9i as needed if LDL-C is not lowered by at least 50% or to the level below 2.0 mmol/L in patients with established CVD. Further, for those with a recent acute coronary syndrome and established coronary disease, consideration is to be given to more aggressive lowering of LDL-C to below 1.8 mmol/L. [2]
Nonetheless, strategies for lowering LDL-C are often poorly adopted in clinical practice, and many patients fail to reach guideline-recommended levels [4-8]. We have recently reported [9] that physician education based on a reminder approach imbedded into clinical practice, improves care significantly as measured by a higher proportion of patients achieving guideline-recommended LDL-C level in association with greater utilization of lipid lowering therapies.
This analysis explores whether patients with private insurance coverage and greater access for lipid lowering therapy experience achievement of recommended LDL-C level more frequently than those patients with public insurance only.
Materials and Methods
The Guidelines Oriented Approach to Lipid lowering (GOAL) Canada [9] was a medical education interventional program supported by Amgen Canada. It was an investigator-initiated study started in 2015 and coordinated by the Canadian Heart Research Centre, an academic research and physician education organization. The intervention studied was physician education based on lipid management reminders applied at the end of each of three visits based on data entry in an electronic case report form (eCRF) and the primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving recommended LDL-C level of < 2.0 mmol/L in those with CVD and < 2.5 mmol/L or ≥ 50% reduction in those with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). All patients were recommended lifestyle modifications including dietary as recommended by the Canadian guidelines. [2] The study was approved by central and institutional research ethics boards where appropriate and all enrolled patients provided informed consent.
Invitations to participate were sent to a convenience sample of 750 Canadian physicians across Canada from a proprietary (CASL Regulation) Canadian Heart Research Centre list of physicians who participated in prior cholesterol-oriented data collection studies and 248 agreed to participate. The participating physicians had the primary and exclusive role in the management of their patients and selection of cholesterol lowering therapies. These physicians were asked to consecutively enrol at least 12 of their patients with either [1] clinical CVD including coronary artery disease (CAD), cerebrovascular disease, abdominal aortic aneurysm, or peripheral arterial disease; or, [2] FH. 2 Current use of PCK9i or prior participation in GOAL Program were the only exclusion criteria [9]. In addition, patient enrolment was allocated such that 2/3 of the patients were required to have private insurance and 1/3 public insurance only. All patients had to have [9] an LDL-C > 2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy (defined as having tried at least two statins, each at least on two reduced doses) for at least three months prior to enrolment. Lipid lowering treatment was assessed on enrolment (visit 1) and twice more during follow up, each approximately 4-6 months apart (visits 2 and 3). The medical education intervention consisted of physician reminders to follow Canadian guideline recommendations [2] at each visit; physicians were also asked to provide reason when guidelines were not followed.
Continuous data are shown as means with standard deviation and categorical data as frequencies and percentages. Group comparisons were made using the chi squared test and t test or Kruskal-Wallis test for discrete and continuous variables, respectively, where appropriate. We used repeated measures analysis to perform univariate and multivariable regression to determine the outcome across the visits.
A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to assess factors independently associated with LDL-C achieving target (2) of ≤2.0 mmol. The following variables were considered: variables in Table 1 with p <0.05, type of insurance, use of statin, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitor. To account for the clustering of patients within visits, we performed a generalized estimating equations (GEE) model. The working correlation structure selected was based on its lowest quasi-likelihood under the independence model criterion (QIC). Adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are presented. A value of P<0.05 was considered significant for all tests except group comparison in Table 1 where correction for multiple (n = 31) comparisons was applied and value of P = 0.002 or less was considered significant. All statistical analyses were performed in SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).
Of 2009 patients enrolled (median age 63 years, 42% female), there were 1284 (64%) patients with private insurance and 725 (36%) with public insurance only. Patients with private insurance were younger and less likely to have history of heart failure or to be on bile acid sequestrants (Table 1). There was no difference in LDL-C level between the two groups and no difference in the use of statin, including high intensity statin, or ezetimibe at baseline (Table 1).
During the follow up, the use of ezetimibe increased from approximately 25% at baseline to over 40% on visit 3 but remained similar between the two groups (Figure 1) while the use of PCSK9i was higher in patients with private insurance (31.7% vs. 21%, p=0.0001). The LDL-C level decreased slightly more in private insurance group at visit 2 (2.37±1.28 vs. 2.52±1.31, p=0.0165) and visit 3 (2.11±1.17 vs 2.31±1.17, p=0.0012). Proportion of patients achieving the recommended LDL-C level was 42.9% in private and 39.8% (p=0.2) in visit 2 and significantly greater in visit 3 (54.0% vs. 45.5%, p=0.001). Private insurance was not an independent predictor of achieving recommended LDL-C level in multivariable analysis (Table 2).
Participating physicians were asked to provide the single most important reason for not being able to follow the guidelines for addition of non-statin therapy. It is notable that physicians identified cost as an issue for not prescribing more often in patients with public insurance as compared to private insurance for either ezetimibe (13.5% vs. 6.6%, p=0.0004) or PCSK9i (33.8% vs. 20.5%, p=0.0001).
Established CVD and FH are both associated with major adverse cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite the use of high intensity statin therapy, many patients do not achieve the recommended LDL-C level. [10-12] The addition of second and third-line non-statin therapies has been shown to further reduce CV events. [13-15]
We found that the availability of private insurance was associated with a 10% greater use of PCSK9i but had no impact on the use of genericized high intensity statin or ezetimibe or both. The greater use of PCSK9i was associated with achievement of the recommended LDL-C level as was the use of statin or ezetimibe therapy. However, availability of private insurance was not predictive of better LDL-C target achievement level in multivariable analysis.
The treatment inertia observed in these high-risk patients was more similar than different between the two groups with private and public only insurance, since most of these patients were not on either PCSK9i or ezetimibe by the end of the follow up.
Our prior observations demonstrate benefit of educational intervention on treatment inertia. [9,16,17] Our findings suggest that the availability of private insurance may play a role in achieving the recommended management in lipid lowering but the benefit of private insurance is modest and the cost of medications itself is not a factor in physicians’ ability to follow the guideline recommended therapy. These findings are consistent with our prior observations on guidelines-oriented management of diabetes mellitus in Canada. [18] Accordingly, other factors may be important. For example, private insurance coverage may vary across Canada with respect to coverage of conditions such as FH. In addition, it is not uncommon for access with or without private insurance to require filling of multiple forms, sometimes multiple times, thereby leading to some inertia irrespective of private coverage. This may account for the improved but less than expected uptake of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with private coverage. This and other barriers that impair achievement of an LDL-C treatment goal may require fuller exploration from both the perspective of patients as well as treating physicians.
This post-hoc analysis is subject to physician and patient selection bias. Physicians invited to participate had prior experience in similar programs and therefore may not be representative of all Canadian health care providers. The extent of the care gap detected, and low use of statin and non-statin therapy argues against selection bias of physicians skilled in the LDL-C management.
While these selection biases may limit the generalizability of our findings, they in no way diminish the validity of our conclusions about the existence of the treatment inertia and only modest impact of private insurance in lipid lowering therapy.
While PCSK9i use was higher in patients with private insurance, the majority of patients with either private or public insurance experienced similar treatment inertia. The cost of medications does not appear to be the dominant reason for care gap in lipid lowering of higher risk patients.
AL has received on behalf of the Canadian Heart Research Centre research grant support from Actelion, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Servier and Sanofi.
LAL has received research grant support from Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Kowa, The Medicines Company, Novartis, and Sanofi. He has also served as a consultant for Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Esperion, HLS, Merck, The Medicines Company, Novartis, and Sanofi
JG has received speaker/consulting honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Sunovion;
SGG has received research grant support (e.g., steering committee or data monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (e.g., advisory boards) from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier; and salary support/honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) Chair, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, and PERFUSE Research Institute
JAS has received research support from Sanofi and has served as a consultant and/or speaker for Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Bayer, HLS Therapeutics Lilly, and Novartis.
Mary Tan has no disclosures.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
