Epidemiology of Geographic Disparities of Myocardial Infarction Among Older Adults in the United States: Analysis of 2000–2017 Medicare Data

Abstract

Background: There are substantial geographic disparities in the life expectancy (LE) across the U.S. with myocardial infarction (MI) contributing significantly to the differences between the states with highest (leading) and lowest (lagging) LE. This study aimed to systematically investigate the epidemiology of geographic disparities in MI among older adults.Methods: Data on MI outcomes among adults aged 65+ were derived from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research database and a 5% sample of Medicare Beneficiaries for 2000–2017. Death certificate-based mortality from MI as underlying/multiple cause of death (CBM-UCD/CBM-MCD), incidence-based mortality (IBM), incidence, prevalence, prevalence at age 65, and 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival, and remaining LE at age 65 were estimated and compared between the leading and lagging states. Cox model was used to investigate the effect of residence in the lagging states on MI incidence and survival.Results: Between 2000 and 2017, MI mortality was higher in the lagging than in the leading states (per 100,000, CBM-UCD: 236.7–583.7 vs. 128.2–357.6, CBM-MCD: 322.7–707.7 vs. 182.4–437.7, IBM: 1330.5–1518.9 vs. 1003.3–1197.0). Compared to the leading states, lagging states had higher MI incidence (1.1–2.0% vs. 0.9–1.8%), prevalence (10.2–13.1% vs. 8.3–11.9%), pre-existing prevalence (2.5–5.1% vs. 1.4–3.6%), and lower survival (70.4 vs. 77.2% for 1-year, 63.2 vs. 67.2% for 3-year, and 52.1 vs. 58.7% for 5-year), and lower remaining LE at age 65 among MI patients (years, 8.8–10.9 vs. 9.9–12.8). Cox model results showed that the lagging states had greater risk of MI incidence [Adjusted hazards ratio, AHR (95% Confidence Interval, CI): 1.18 (1.16, 1.19)] and death after MI diagnosis [1.22 (1.21, 1.24)]. Study results also showed alarming declines in survival and remaining LE at age 65 among MI patients.Conclusion: There are substantial geographic disparities in MI outcomes, with lagging states having higher MI mortality, incidence, and prevalence, lower survival and remaining LE at age 65. Disparities in MI mortality in a great extent could be due to between-the-state differences in MI incidence, prevalence at age 65 and survival. Observed declines in survival and remaining LE require an urgent analysis of contributing factors that must be addressed.