Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in awareness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk among women between 1997 and 2012 by racial/ethnic and age groups, as well as knowledge of CVD symptoms and preventive behaviors/barriers. Methods and Results A study of awareness of CVD was conducted by the American Heart Association in 2012 among US women >25 years of age identified through random-digit dialing (n=1205) and Harris Poll Online (n=1227), similar to prior American Heart Association national surveys. Standardized questions on awareness were given to all women; additional questions about preventive behaviors/barriers were given online. Data were weighted, and results were compared with triennial surveys since 1997. Between 1997 and 2012, the rate of awareness of CVD as the leading cause of death nearly doubled (56% versus 30%; P<0.001). The rate of awareness among black and Hispanic women in 2012 (36% and 34%, respectively) was similar to that of white women in 1997 (33%). In 1997, women were more likely to cite cancer than CVD as the leading killer (35% versus 30%), but in 2012, the trend reversed (24% versus 56%). Awareness of atypical symptoms of CVD has improved since 1997 but remains low. The most common reasons why women took preventive action were to improve health and to feel better, not to live longer. Conclusions Awareness of CVD among women has improved in the past 15 years, but a significant racial/ethnic minority gap persists. Continued effort is needed to reach at-risk populations. These data should inform public health campaigns to focus on evidenced-based strategies to prevent CVD and to help target messages that resonate and motivate women to take action.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is an increasingly common condition that is believed to affect >25% of adults worldwide. Unless specific testing is done to identify NAFLD, the condition is typically silent until advanced and potentially irreversible liver impairment occurs. For this reason, the majority of patients with NAFLD are unaware of having this serious condition. Hepatic complications from NAFLD include nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, hepatic cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. In addition to these serious complications, NAFLD is a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, which is the principal cause of death in patients with NAFLD. Accordingly, the purpose of this scientific statement is to review the underlying risk factors and pathophysiology of NAFLD, the associations with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diagnostic and screening strategies, and potential interventions.

Background: The inclusion of Z-codes for social determinants of health (SDOH) in the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) may offer an opportunity to improve data collection of SDOH, but no characterization of their utilization exists on a national all-payer level. Objective: To examine the prevalence of SDOH Z-codes and compare characteristics of patients with and without Z-codes and hospitals that do and do not use Z-codes. Research Design: Retrospective cohort study using 2016 and 2017 National Inpatient Sample. Participants: Total of 14,289,644 inpatient hospitalizations. Measures: Prevalence of SDOH Z-codes (codes Z55–Z65) and descriptive statistics of patients and hospitals. Results: Of admissions, 269,929 (1.9%) included SDOH Z-codes. Average monthly SDOH Z-code use increased across the study period by 0.01% per month (P<0.001). The cumulative number and proportion of hospitals that had ever used an SDOH Z-code also increased, from 1895 hospitals (41%) in January 2016 to 3210 hospitals (70%) in December 2017. Hospitals that coded at least 1 SDOH Z-code were larger, private not-for-profit, and urban teaching hospitals. Compared with admissions without an SDOH Z-code, admissions with them were for patients who were younger, more often male, Medicaid recipients or uninsured. A higher proportion of admissions with SDOH Z-codes were for mental health (44.0% vs. 3.3%, P<0.001) and alcohol and substance use disorders (9.6% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001) compared with those without. Conclusions: The uptake of SDOH Z-codes has been slow, and current coding is likely poorly reflective of the actual burden of social needs experienced by hospitalized patients.

Background and Purpose: The rural-urban life-expectancy gap is widening, but underlying causes are incompletely understood. Prior studies suggest stroke care may be worse for individuals in more rural areas, and technological advancements in stroke care may disproportionately impact individuals in more rural areas. We sought to examine differences and 5-year trends in the care and outcomes of patients hospitalized for stroke across rural-urban strata. Methods: Retrospective cohort study using National Inpatient Sample data from 2012 to 2017. Rurality was classified by county of residence according to the 6-strata National Center for Health Statistics classification scheme. Results: There were 792 054 hospitalizations for acute stroke in our sample. Rural patients were more often white (78% versus 49%), older than 75 (44% versus 40%), and in the lowest quartile of income (59% versus 32%) compared with urban patients. Among patients with acute ischemic stroke, intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapy use were lower for rural compared with urban patients (intravenous thrombolysis: 4.2% versus 9.2%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.51–0.59], P <0.001; endovascular therapy: 1.63% versus 2.41%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.64 [0.57–0.73], P <0.001). Urban-rural gaps in both therapies persisted from 2012 to 2017. Overall, stroke mortality was higher in rural than urban areas (6.87% versus 5.82%, P <0.001). Adjusted in-patient mortality rates increased across categories of increasing rurality (suburban, 0.97 [0.94–1.0], P =0.086; large towns, 1.05 [1.01–1.09], P =0.009; small towns, 1.10 [1.06–1.15], P <0.001; micropolitan rural, 1.16 [1.11–1.21], P <0.001; and remote rural 1.21 [1.15–1.27], P <0.001 compared with urban patients. Mortality for rural patients compared with urban patients did not improve from 2012 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.12 [1.00–1.26], P <0.001) to 2017 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27 [1.13–1.42], P <0.001). Conclusions: Rural patients with stroke were less likely to receive intravenous thrombolysis or endovascular therapy and had higher in-hospital mortality than their urban counterparts. These gaps did not improve over time. Enhancing access to evidence-based stroke care may be a target for reducing rural-urban disparities.

IMPORTANCEThere are racial inequities in health care access and quality in the United States. It is unknown whether such differences for racial and ethnic minority beneficiaries differ between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare or whether access and quality are better for minority beneficiaries in 1 of the 2 programs. OBJECTIVE To compare differences in rates of enrollment, ambulatory care access, and ambulatory care quality by race and ethnicity in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Exploratory observational cohort study of a nationally representative sample of 45 833 person-years (26 887 persons) in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey from 2015 to 2018, comparing differences in program enrollment and measures of access and quality by race and ethnicity. EXPOSURES Minority race and ethnicity (Black, Hispanic, Native American, or Asian/Pacific Islander) vs White or multiracial; Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare enrollment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESSix patient-reported measures of ambulatory care access (whether a beneficiary had a usual source of care in the past year, had a primary care clinician usual source of care, or had a specialist visit) and quality (influenza vaccination, pneumonia vaccination, and colon cancer screening). RESULTSThe final sample included 6023 persons (mean age, 68.9 [SD, 12.6] years; 57.3% women) from minority groups and 20 864 persons (mean age, 71.9 [SD, 10.8] years; 54.9% women) from White or multiracial groups, who accounted for 9816 and 36 017 person-years, respectively. Comparing Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare among minority beneficiaries, those in Medicare Advantage had significantly better rates of access to a primary care clinician usual source of care (79.1% vs 72.5%; adjusted marginal difference, 4.0%; 95% CI, 1.0%-6.9%), influenza vaccinations (67.3% vs 63.0%; adjusted marginal difference, 5.2%; 95% CI, 1.9%-8.5%), pneumonia vaccinations (70.7% vs 64.6%; adjusted marginal difference, 6.1%; 95% CI, 2.7%-9.4%), and colon cancer screenings (69.4% vs 61.1%; adjusted marginal difference, 7.1%; 95% CI, 3.8%-10.3%). Comparing minority vs White or multiracial beneficiaries across both programs, minority beneficiaries had significantly lower rates of access to a primary care clinician usual source of care (adjusted marginal difference, 4.7%; 95% CI, 2.5%-6.8%), specialist visits (adjusted marginal difference, 10.8%; 95% CI, 8.3%-13.3%), influenza vaccinations (adjusted marginal difference, 4.3%; 95% CI, 1.2%-7.4%), and pneumonia vaccinations (adjusted marginal difference, 6.4%; 95% CI, 3.9%-9.0%). The interaction of race and ethnicity with insurance type was not statistically significant for any of the 6 outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this exploratory study of Medicare beneficiaries in 2015-2018, enrollment in Medicare Advantage vs traditional Medicare was significantly associated with better outcomes for access and quality among minority beneficiaries; however, minority beneficiaries were si...