Literature DB >> 10051777

Differences in discharge medication after acute myocardial infarction in patients with HMO and fee-for-service medical insurance.

D McCormick1, J H Gurwitz, J Savageau, J Yarzebski, J M Gore, R J Goldberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of fee-for-service (FFS) versus HMO medical insurance coverage on receipt of aspirin, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers at the time of hospital discharge following an acute myocardial infarction.
DESIGN: Prospective, population-based study.
SETTING: All 16 community and tertiary care hospitals in the metropolitan area of Worcester, Massachusetts. PATIENTS: The study population consisted of patients under 65 years of age hospitalized with a validated acute myocardial infarction in all hospitals in the Worcester (Massachusetts) Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (1990 census estimate, 437,000) during 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, and 1993.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After adjustment for demographic and clinical variables as well as study year, the odds ratios for receipt of each medication for patients with HMO insurance compared with FFS were 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77, 1.44) for aspirin, 1.32 (95% CI 0.98, 1.76) for beta-blockers, and 0.72 (95% CI 0.54, 0.96) for calcium channel blockers. Examination of temporal trends in utilization of these agents suggests that observed decreases in use of calcium channel blockers and increases in use of beta-blockers over the period under study occurred more rapidly for HMO than for FFS patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, use of aspirin and beta-blockers was comparable among HMO and FFS patients and use of calcium channel blockers (deemed less effective or ineffective for secondary prevention) was lower among HMO patients. Differential adoption, over time, of evidence-based prescribing practices for medications between HMO and FFS patients who have had a myocardial infarction warrants further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10051777     DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00290.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  45 in total

1.  Expected source of payment and use of hospital services for coronary atherosclerosis.

Authors:  D H Kuykendall; M L Johnson; J M Geraci
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction).

Authors:  T J Ryan; J L Anderson; E M Antman; B A Braniff; N H Brooks; R M Califf; L D Hillis; L F Hiratzka; E Rapaport; B J Riegel; R O Russell; E E Smith; W D Weaver
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1996-11-01       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Managed care plan performance since 1980. A literature analysis.

Authors:  R H Miller; H S Luft
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-05-18       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The impact of clinical trials on the use of medications for acute myocardial infarction. Results of a community-based study.

Authors:  N F Col; T J McLaughlin; S B Soumerai; D W Hosmer; J Yarzebski; J H Gurwitz; J M Gore; R J Goldberg
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1996-01-08

5.  The beta-blocker heart attack trial. beta-Blocker Heart Attack Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1981-11-06       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A national survey of the arrangements managed-care plans make with physicians.

Authors:  M R Gold; R Hurley; T Lake; T Ensor; R Berenson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-12-21       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Cardiologists' practices compared with practice guidelines: use of beta-blockade after acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  D A Brand; L N Newcomer; A Freiburger; H Tian
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1995-11-15       Impact factor: 24.094

8.  Early administration of nifedipine in suspected acute myocardial infarction. The Secondary Prevention Reinfarction Israel Nifedipine Trial 2 Study.

Authors:  U Goldbourt; S Behar; H Reicher-Reiss; M Zion; L Mandelzweig; E Kaplinsky
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1993-02-08

9.  Resource utilization in treatment of acute myocardial infarction: staff-model health maintenance organization versus fee-for-service hospitals. The MITI Investigators. Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention.

Authors:  N R Every; S D Fihn; C Maynard; J S Martin; W D Weaver
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Recent changes in attack and survival rates of acute myocardial infarction (1975 through 1981). The Worcester Heart Attack Study.

Authors:  R J Goldberg; J M Gore; J S Alpert; J E Dalen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986 May 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Managed care and quality of care.

Authors:  H M Krumholz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Influence of physician specialty on adoption and relinquishment of calcium channel blockers and other treatments for myocardial infarction.

Authors:  S R Majumdar; T S Inui; J H Gurwitz; M W Gillman; T J McLaughlin; S B Soumerai
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Chronic disease medication use in managed care and indemnity insurance plans.

Authors:  Randall S Stafford; Stephen M Davidson; Harriet Davidson; Heidi Miracle-McMahill; Sybil L Crawford; David Blumenthal
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Neighborhood socioeconomic status, Medicaid coverage and medical management of myocardial infarction: atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) community surveillance.

Authors:  Randi E Foraker; Kathryn M Rose; Eric A Whitsel; Chirayath M Suchindran; Joy L Wood; Wayne D Rosamond
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 3.295

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.