Impact of neighborhood social disadvantage on the presentation and management of peripheral artery disease

Abstract

Objective: Studies examining the relationship between socioeconomic disparities and peripheral artery disease (PAD) often focus on individual social health determinants and fail to account for the complex interplay between factors that ultimately impact disease severity and outcomes. Area deprivation index (ADI), a validated measure of neighborhood adversity, provides a more comprehensive assessment of social disadvantage. Therefore, we examined the impact of ADI on PAD severity and its management.

Methods: We identified all patients who underwent infrainguinal revascularization (open or endovascular) or amputation for symptomatic PAD in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry between 2003 and 2020. An ADI score of 1 to 100 was assigned to each patient based on their residential zip code, with higher ADI scores corresponding with increasing adversity. Patients were categorized by ADI quintiles (Q1-Q5). The outcomes of interest included indication for procedure (claudication, rest pain, or tissue loss) and rates of revascularization (vs primary amputation). Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate for an independent association between ADI quintile and these outcomes.

Results: Among the 79,973 patients identified, 9604 (12%) were in the lowest ADI quintile (Q1), 14,961 (18.7%) in Q2, 19,800 (24.8%) in Q3, 21,735 (27.2%) in Q4, and 13,873 (17.4%) in Q5. There were significant trends toward lower rates of claudication (Q1: 39% vs Q5: 34%, P < .001), higher rates of rest pain (Q1: 12.4% vs Q5: 17.8%, P < .001) as the indication for intervention, and lower rates of revascularization (Q1: 80% vs Q5: 69%, P < .001) with increasing ADI quintiles. In adjusted analyses, there was a progressively higher likelihood of presenting with rest pain vs claudication, with patients in Q5 having the highest probability when compared with those in Q1 (relative risk: 2.0; 95% confidence interval: 1.8-2.2; P < .001). Patients in Q5, when compared with those in Q1, also had a higher likelihood of presenting with tissue loss vs claudication (relative risk: 1.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.3-1.6; P < .001). Compared with patients in Q1, patients in Q2-Q5 had a lower likelihood of undergoing any revascularization procedure.

Conclusions: Among patients who underwent infrainguinal revascularization or amputation in the Vascular Quality Initiative, those with higher neighborhood adversity had more advanced disease at presentation and lower rates of revascularization. Further work is needed to better understand neighborhood factors that are contributing to these disparities in order to identify community-level targets for improvement.

Keywords: Amputation; Area deprivation index; Disadvantage; Disparity; Equity; Lower extremity; Neighborhood; PAD; PVD; Peripheral artery disease; Revascularization; VQI.

Figure 1.

Proportion of patients undergoing revascularization (open or endovascular) or amputation stratified by indication among ADI quintiles in the VQI between 2003-2020. * p values referent to cuzick’s trend test.

Figure 2.

Tissue loss severity among ADI quintiles in patients undergoing endovascular revascularization (PVI). * p values referent to Cuzick’s trend test.

Figure 3

Proportion of patients undergoing revascularization (vs ampuation) among ADI quintiles in the VQI between 2003-2020. * p values referent to cuzick’s trend test; CLTI – Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.