TY - JOUR T1 - Outcomes after peripheral artery disease intervention among Medicare–Medicaid dual-eligible patients compared with the general medicare population in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry JF - BMJ Surgery, Interventions, & Health Technologies DO - 10.1136/bmjsit-2019-000018 VL - 1 IS - 1 SP - e000018 AU - Andrea M Austin AU - Gouri Chakraborti AU - Jesse Columbo AU - Niveditta Ramkumar AU - Kayla Moore AU - Michelle Scheurich AU - Phil Goodney Y1 - 2019/11/01 UR - http://sit.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000018.abstract N2 - Objective To determine whether patients from the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry who are Medicare–Medicaid dual-eligible have outcomes after surgical intervention with medical devices such as stents for peripheral artery disease comparable to the outcomes of those eligible for Medicare alone.Methods The study cohort included fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2015 who underwent peripheral vascular intervention as determined by the VQI. We performed propensity matching between the dual-eligible and non-dual-eligible cohorts. Postintervention use, including imaging, amputation and death, was determined using Medicare claims data.Results Rates of major amputation were higher among dual-eligible patients (13.0% vs 10.5%, p<0.001), while time to amputation by disease severity was similar (p=0.443). For patients with more advanced disease (critical limb ischaemia (CLI) vs claudication), dual-eligible patients have significantly faster times to any amputation and death (p<0.001). For of postoperative imaging, 48.4% of dual-eligible patients receive at least one postoperative image, while the percentage for non-dual-eligible patients is 47.2% (p=0.187).Conclusions Patients with mild forms of peripheral artery disease (PAD), such as claudication, demonstrated similar outcomes regardless of dual-eligibility status. However, those with severe PAD, such as CLI, who were also dual-eligible had both inferior overall survival and amputation-free survival. Minimal differences were observed in process-driven aspects of care between dual-eligible and non-dual-eligible patients, including postoperative imaging. These findings indicate that despite receiving similar care, dual-eligible patients with severe PAD have inferior long-term outcomes, suggesting the Medicaid safety net is not timely enough to benefit from long-term outcomes for these patients. ER -