Literature DB >> 17283258

Certificate of need regulation and cardiac catheterization appropriateness after acute myocardial infarction.

Joseph S Ross1, Vivian Ho, Yongfei Wang, Stephen S Cha, Andrew J Epstein, Frederick A Masoudi, Brahmajee K Nallamothu, Harlan M Krumholz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Certificate of need (CON) regulation was introduced to control healthcare costs and improve quality of care in part by limiting the number of facilities providing complex medical care. Our objective was to examine whether rates of appropriate cardiac catheterization after admission for acute myocardial infarction varied between states with and without CON regulation of cardiac catheterization. METHODS AND
RESULTS: We performed a retrospective analysis of chart-abstracted data for 137,279 Medicare patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction between 1994 and 1996 at 4179 US acute-care hospitals. Using 3-level hierarchical generalized linear modeling adjusted for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and physician and hospital characteristics, we compared catheterization rates within 60 days of admission for states (and the District of Columbia) with (n=32) and without (n=19) CON regulation in the full cohort and stratified by catheterization appropriateness. Appropriateness was categorized as strongly, equivocally, or weakly indicated. We found CON regulation was associated with a borderline-significant lower rate of catheterization overall (45.8% versus 46.5%; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.00, P=0.06). After stratification by appropriateness, CON regulation was not associated with a significantly lower rate of catheterization among 63,823 patients with strong indications (49.9% versus 50.3%; adjusted RR 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.02, P=0.17). However, CON regulation was associated with significantly lower rates of catheterization among 65,077 patients with equivocal indication (45.0% versus 46.0%; adjusted RR 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.00, P=0.05) and among 8379 patients with weak indications (19.8% versus 21.8%; adjusted RR 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.98, P=0.04). Associations were weakened substantially after adjustment for hospital coronary artery bypass graft surgery or cardiac catheterization capability.
CONCLUSIONS: CON regulation was associated with modestly lower rates of equivocally and weakly indicated cardiac catheterization after admission for acute myocardial infarction, but no significant differences existed in rates of strongly indicated catheterization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17283258     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.658377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  9 in total

1.  Cardiac Certificate of Need regulations and the availability and use of revascularization services.

Authors:  Vivian Ho; Joseph S Ross; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.749

2.  The Effect of Hospital Market Competition on the Adoption of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Raymond J Strobel; Donald S Likosky; Alexander A Brescia; Karen M Kim; Xiaoting Wu; Himanshu J Patel; G Michael Deeb; Michael P Thompson
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Determinants of cardiac catheterization use in older Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Dennis T Ko; Joseph S Ross; Yongfei Wang; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2009-12-08

4.  Variation in receipt of radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery: assessing the impact of physicians and geographic regions.

Authors:  Aaron J Feinstein; Pamela R Soulos; Jessica B Long; Jeph Herrin; Kenneth B Roberts; James B Yu; Cary P Gross
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Association of race and sex with risk of incident acute coronary heart disease events.

Authors:  Monika M Safford; Todd M Brown; Paul M Muntner; Raegan W Durant; Stephen Glasser; Jewell H Halanych; James M Shikany; Ronald J Prineas; Tandaw Samdarshi; Vera A Bittner; Cora E Lewis; Christopher Gamboa; Mary Cushman; Virginia Howard; George Howard
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Certificate-of-Need Programs Are Associated with a Reduced Incidence, Expenditure, and Rate of Complications with Respect to Knee Arthroscopy in the Medicare Population.

Authors:  Jourdan M Cancienne; Robert Browning; Emmanuel Haug; James A Browne; Brian C Werner
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2019-07-29

7.  Certificate of need laws: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Christopher J Conover; James Bailey
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Association of Statewide Certificate of Need Regulations With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Appropriateness and Outcomes.

Authors:  Philip W Chui; Craig S Parzynski; Joseph S Ross; Nihar R Desai; Hitinder S Gurm; John A Spertus; Arnold H Seto; Vivian Ho; Jeptha P Curtis
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Appropriate Use Criteria Outperform Certificate of Need.

Authors:  H Vernon Anderson
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 5.501

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.