Literature DB >> 10073849

Association between percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty volumes and outcomes in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project 1993-1994.

J L Ritchie1, C Maynard, M K Chapko, N R Every, D C Martin.   

Abstract

Studies from a variety of settings have indicated that outcomes for coronary angioplasty are improved when performed in institutions with high caseloads (> 400/year). The purpose of this investigation was to examine the volume outcome hypothesis for coronary angioplasty in a 20% stratified sample of acute care, non-federal hospitals in 17 states. Data were derived from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from the Health Care Cost and Utilization Project releases 2 and 3. From these records, 163,527 angioplasties from 214 hospitals were selected. Outcomes included hospital mortality, same-admission coronary artery bypass surgery, and a combined end point of either death or same-admission surgery, or both. Hospital volumes were defined as low (< or = 200 cases/year), medium (201 to 400), and high (> 400). Analyses were conducted separately for patients with and without a principal discharge diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). For both AMI and no-AMI groups, the rates of adverse outcomes were generally lower in high-volume institutions, and this finding was true in both univariate and multivariate analyses. Although 27% of hospitals were in the low-volume category, only 5% of all procedures were performed in these institutions. Projecting to all United States hospitals for the 2 years, if all procedures performed in low-volume centers had been done in high-volume institutions, 137 deaths could have been averted (90 AMIs, 47 no-AMIs) as well as 404 (46 AMIs, 358 no-AMIs) same-admission surgeries. The results of this study support the hypothesis that better results are obtained in higher volume institutions, but also show that in 1993 and 1994, relatively few patients had their procedures performed in low-volume institutions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10073849     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00901-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  5 in total

1.  A case study of hospital closure and centralization of coronary revascularization procedures.

Authors:  B R Hemmelgarn; W A Ghali; H Quan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-05-15       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Specificity of procedure volume and in-hospital mortality association.

Authors:  Veerajalandhar Allareddy; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; Badrinath R Konety
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Hospital percutaneous coronary intervention volume and patient mortality, 1998 to 2000: does the evidence support current procedure volume minimums?

Authors:  Andrew J Epstein; Saif S Rathore; Kevin G M Volpp; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-05-19       Impact factor: 24.094

4.  Socioeconomic inequalities in quality of care and outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome in the modern era of drug eluting stents.

Authors:  Celina M Yong; Freddy Abnousi; Steven M Asch; Paul A Heidenreich
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 5.501

5.  Payer leverage and hospital compliance with a benchmark: a population-based observational study.

Authors:  John M Hollingsworth; Sarah L Krein; David C Miller; Sonya DeMonner; Brent K Hollenbeck
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-07-18       Impact factor: 2.655

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.