Explore ›
Finding
Finding
null
Commercially insured patients with intellectual/developmental disabilities and heart failure had a lower but statistically insignificant difference in pharmacy claims for ACE inhibitor/ARB therapy compared to non-IDD patients (50.3% vs 55.4%), the only one of five guideline-based pharmacotherapy measures that did not reach significance.
| Effect size | adjusted OR 0.87 |
| CI | 95% CI = 0.76-1.003 |
| Comparator | Non-IDD patients with HF in the same commercially insured database (n=236,638) |
| Effect summary | null; adjusted OR 0.87; CI: 95% CI = 0.76-1.003 |
| Effect modifiers | [{"modifier": "IDD subtype (Down syndrome)", "interaction_p": "", "direction": "amplifies", "stratum_details": "Down syndrome vs autism spectrum disorder: adjusted OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.16-0.66 for ACE inhibitor/ARB use in HF", "plain_language": "Even though the overall IDD vs non-IDD comparison was null, patients with Down syndrome specifically had significantly lower ACE inhibitor/ARB prescribing within the IDD group", "annotation_notes": "Interesting disconnect: overall IDD disparity is null for ACE/ARB, but Down syndrome subgroup shows significant disparity within IDD"}] |
Connected entities
Interventions
Outcomes
Source
PMC8009695
Disparities in the Use of Guideline-Based Pharmacotherapy Exist for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Heart Failure Patients Who Have Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities in a Commercially Insured Database