Literature DB >> 14743139

Multistate improvement in process and outcomes of carotid endarterectomy.

Timothy F Kresowik1, Dale W Bratzler, Rebecca A Kresowik, Marc E Hendel, Sherry L Grund, Kellie R Brown, David S Nilasena.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of community-wide performance measurement and feedback on key processes and outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA).
METHODS: Complete medical record (hospital chart) review for indications, care processes, and outcomes was performed on a random sample of Medicare patients undergoing CEA in 10 states (Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma) during baseline (Jun 1, 1995 to May 31, 1996) and remeasurement (Jun 1, 1998 to May 31, 1999) periods. In addition to review of the index hospital stay, hospital admissions within 30 days of the procedure were reviewed and the Medicare enrollment database queried to identify out-of-hospital deaths, to determine 30-day outcome results. The baseline data by state were provided to the Medicare Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs) in the respective states, and quality improvement initiatives were encouraged.
RESULTS: We reviewed 9945 primary CEA alone procedures, 236 CEA and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures, and 380 repeat CEA operations during the baseline period (B), and 9745 primary CEA alone procedures, 233 CEA and CABG procedures, and 401 repeat CEA operations during the remeasurement period (R). There was a significant decrease in the combined event rate (30-day stroke or mortality) for CEA alone procedures between baseline and remeasurement (B, 5.6%; R, 5.0%). A decrease occurred in each of the indication strata; transient ischemic attack or stroke (B, 7.7%; R, 6.9%), nonspecific symptoms (B, 5.9%; R, 5.4%), and no symptoms (B, 4.1%; R, 3.8%). The combined event rate also decreased for CEA and CABG (B, 17.4%; R, 13.3%) and repeat CEA operations (B, 6.8%; R, 5.7%). The remeasurement period state-to-state variation in combined event rate for CEA alone ranged from 2.7% (Georgia) to 5.9% (Indiana) for all indications combined, from 4.4% (Georgia) to 10.9% (Michigan) in patients with recent transient ischemia or stroke, from 1.4% (Georgia) to 6.0% (Oklahoma) in patients with no symptoms, and from 3.7% (Georgia) to 7.9% (Indiana) in patients with nonspecific symptoms. There were significant increases in preoperative antiplatelet administration (62%-67%; P <.0001) and patching (29%-45%; P =.05) from baseline to remeasurement in the CEA alone subset. Preoperative antiplatelet administration and patching were associated with improved outcomes in the combined baseline and remeasurement data.
CONCLUSIONS: Community-wide quality improvement initiatives with performance measurement and confidential reporting of provider level data can lead to improvement in important care processes and outcomes. There is considerable variation between states in outcome and process, and thus continued room for improvement. Quality improvement projects that include standardized confidential outcome reporting should be encouraged. Preoperative antiplatelet therapy administration and patching rates should be considered as evidence-based performance measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14743139     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2003.09.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  8 in total

Review 1.  Symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis: how, when, and who to treat?

Authors:  Peter M Rothwell
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.113

2.  Composition of the stable carotid plaque: insights from a multidetector computed tomography study of plaque volume.

Authors:  Kiran R Nandalur; Andrew D Hardie; Prashant Raghavan; Matthew J Schipper; Erol Baskurt; Christopher M Kramer
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  Postendarterectomy mortality in octogenarians and nonagenarians in the USA from 1993 to 1999.

Authors:  Judith H Lichtman; Sara B Jones; Yun Wang; Emi Watanabe; Norrina B Allen; Pierre Fayad; Larry B Goldstein
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 2.762

Review 4.  Roles for specialty societies and vascular surgeons in accountable care organizations.

Authors:  Philip P Goodney; Elliott S Fisher; Richard P Cambria
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Guidelines for the primary prevention of stroke: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

Authors:  James F Meschia; Cheryl Bushnell; Bernadette Boden-Albala; Lynne T Braun; Dawn M Bravata; Seemant Chaturvedi; Mark A Creager; Robert H Eckel; Mitchell S V Elkind; Myriam Fornage; Larry B Goldstein; Steven M Greenberg; Susanna E Horvath; Costantino Iadecola; Edward C Jauch; Wesley S Moore; John A Wilson
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 6.  Meta-analysis of the procedural risks of carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting over time.

Authors:  K Lokuge; D D de Waard; A Halliday; A Gray; R Bulbulia; B Mihaylova
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Outcomes of Vascular and Endovascular Interventions Performed During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

Authors:  Ruth A Benson; Sandip Nandhra
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 13.787

Review 8.  The management of carotid restenosis: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Francesco Stilo; Nunzio Montelione; Rosalinda Calandrelli; Marisa Distefano; Francesco Spinelli; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro; Fabio Pilato
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-10
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.