Multi-dimensional Social Adversity and Mortality Outcome in People Living With HIV and Heart Failure: Insights from NYC Health + Hospitals HIV-Heart Failure cohort
Chen, Y.-Y.; Borkowski, P.; Biavati, L.; Nazarenko, N.; Parker, M. W.; Kharawala, A.; Vargas-Pena, C.; Chowdhury, I.; Bock, J.; Garg, V.; Bhakta, S.; Faillace, R.; Palaiodimos, L.; Wu, W.-C.; Salmoirago-Blotcher, E.; Erqou, S.; Longenecker, C. T.
Show abstract
BackgroundHeart failure (HF) is an increasingly common comorbidity among people living with HIV (PLHIV), complicating care and heightening vulnerability of this population to social adversity (SA). However, the impact of different SA domains on outcomes in this population remains poorly understood. MethodsWe analyzed data on PLHIV with HF from the NYC Health + Hospitals HIV-Heart Failure cohort. Baseline multidimensional SA was assessed by licensed clinical social workers using standardized evaluations and grouped into five domains: (1) economic hardship, (2) healthcare access barriers, (3) neighborhood/built environment instability, (4) social support challenge, and (5) Psycho-behavioral instability. We used multivariable adjusted Cox models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortality; and logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of 6-month rehospitalization risk. ResultsAmong participants 1044 (62.9% males, mean age: 61.6 years), 601 (58%) reported at least 1social adversities: economic hardship (n=130), limited healthcare access (n=155), unstable housing (n=129), social support challenge (n=179), or psycho-behavioral instability (n=438). Over a mean follow up of 3.8 years, exposure to any SA was associated with higher all-cause mortality (HR 4.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.03-6.14), CV mortality (HR 4.05; 95% CI 2.17-6.83), and infection-related mortality (HR 2.37; 95% CI 1.23-4.56). Social support challenge (HR 2.19; 95% CI 1.35-3.55) and psycho-behavioral instability (HR 1.96; 95% CI 1.24-3.11) were associated with higher CV mortality; economic hardship (HR 2.40; 95% CI 1.22-4.70) and social support challenge (HR 3.09; 95% CI 1.75-5.48) were associated with higher infection-related mortality. Compared with patients without SA, those with an environment instability, psycho-behavioral instability, or social support challenges had a 73% (aOR 1.73; 95% CI, 1.15-2.06), 75% (aOR 1.75; 95% CI, 1.31-2.35), and 44% (aOR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.00-2.06) higher risk of rehospitalization within 6 months, respectively. ConclusionSA was significantly associated with mortality and rehospitalization among PLHIV with HF, with domain-specific pathways influencing specific outcomes. A multidimensional assessment of social vulnerability may be useful to risk-stratify HF mortality risk in PLHIV.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Association of Cardiologist Clinic Visits with Cardiovascular Primary Prevention Outcomes Among People with HIV from Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Groups in the Southern United States 96%
- Social Networks and Cardiovascular Disease Events in the Jackson Heart Study 94%
- HIV infection and incidence of cardiovascular diseases: an analysis of a large healthcare database 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Inequalities in access to and outcomes of cardiac surgery in England: retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics (2010-2019) 92%
- Predicting the risk of motor vehicle crash in the first year after cardioverter-defibrillator implantation 92%
- Cardiac Microstructural Abnormalities Identify Women at Risk of Incident Heart Failure 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in age, sex and racial differences in the incidence of infective endocarditis in Florida and New York 94%
- Arrhythmia and Survival Outcomes among Black and White Patients with a Primary Prevention Defibrillator 92%
- National Trends and Disparities in Hospitalization for Hypertensive Emergencies Among Medicare Beneficiaries, 1999–2019 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.