Thomas M Maddox1, Paul S Chan2, John A Spertus2, Fengming Tang3, Phil Jones3, P Michael Ho4, Steven M Bradley4, Thomas T Tsai4, Deepak L Bhatt5, Pamela N Peterson6. 1. Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Denver, Colorado; University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado; Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium, Denver, Colorado. Electronic address: thomas.maddox@va.gov. 2. Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri; University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri. 3. Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri. 4. Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Denver, Colorado; University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado; Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium, Denver, Colorado. 5. Veterans Affairs Boston Health Care System, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado; Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium, Denver, Colorado; Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study assessed practice variations in secondary prevention medication prescriptions among coronary artery disease (CAD) patients treated in outpatient practices participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry. BACKGROUND: Among patients with CAD, secondary prevention with a combination of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and statins reduces cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). Accordingly, every CAD patient should receive the combination of these medications for which they are eligible. However, little is known about current prescription patterns of these medications and the variation in use among outpatient cardiology clinics. METHODS: Using data from NCDR PINNACLE registry, a national outpatient cardiology practice registry, we assessed medication prescription patterns among eligible CAD patients, between July 2008 and December 2010. Overall rates of prescription and variation by practice were calculated, adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Among 156,145 CAD patients in 58 practices, 103,830 (66.5%) patients were prescribed the optimal combination of medications for which they were eligible. The median rate of optimal combined prescription by practice was 73.5% and varied from 28.8% to 100%. After adjustment for patient factors, the practice median rate ratio for prescription was 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.20 to 1.32), indicating a 25% likelihood that 2 random practices would differ in treating identical CAD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among a national registry of CAD patients treated in outpatient cardiology practices, over one-third of patients failed to receive their optimal combination of secondary prevention medications. Significant variation was observed across practices, even after adjusting for patient characteristics, suggesting that quality improvement efforts may be needed to support more uniform practice.
OBJECTIVES: This study assessed practice variations in secondary prevention medication prescriptions among coronary artery disease (CAD) patients treated in outpatient practices participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry. BACKGROUND: Among patients with CAD, secondary prevention with a combination of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and statins reduces cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). Accordingly, every CAD patient should receive the combination of these medications for which they are eligible. However, little is known about current prescription patterns of these medications and the variation in use among outpatient cardiology clinics. METHODS: Using data from NCDR PINNACLE registry, a national outpatient cardiology practice registry, we assessed medication prescription patterns among eligible CAD patients, between July 2008 and December 2010. Overall rates of prescription and variation by practice were calculated, adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Among 156,145 CAD patients in 58 practices, 103,830 (66.5%) patients were prescribed the optimal combination of medications for which they were eligible. The median rate of optimal combined prescription by practice was 73.5% and varied from 28.8% to 100%. After adjustment for patient factors, the practice median rate ratio for prescription was 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.20 to 1.32), indicating a 25% likelihood that 2 random practices would differ in treating identical CAD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among a national registry of CAD patients treated in outpatient cardiology practices, over one-third of patients failed to receive their optimal combination of secondary prevention medications. Significant variation was observed across practices, even after adjusting for patient characteristics, suggesting that quality improvement efforts may be needed to support more uniform practice.
Authors: Elizabeth A McGlynn; Steven M Asch; John Adams; Joan Keesey; Jennifer Hicks; Alison DeCristofaro; Eve A Kerr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sidney C Smith; Emelia J Benjamin; Robert O Bonow; Lynne T Braun; Mark A Creager; Barry A Franklin; Raymond J Gibbons; Scott M Grundy; Loren F Hiratzka; Daniel W Jones; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Margo Minissian; Lori Mosca; Eric D Peterson; Ralph L Sacco; John Spertus; James H Stein; Kathryn A Taubert Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-11-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Joseph Drozda; Joseph V Messer; John Spertus; Bruce Abramowitz; Karen Alexander; Craig T Beam; Robert O Bonow; Jill S Burkiewicz; Michael Crouch; David C Goff; Richard Hellman; Thomas James; Marjorie L King; Edison A Machado; Eduardo Ortiz; Michael O'Toole; Stephen D Persell; Jesse M Pines; Frank J Rybicki; Lawrence B Sadwin; Joanna D Sikkema; Peter K Smith; Patrick J Torcson; John B Wong Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Paul S Chan; William J Oetgen; Donna Buchanan; Kristi Mitchell; Fran F Fiocchi; Fengming Tang; Philip G Jones; Tracie Breeding; Duane Thrutchley; John S Rumsfeld; John A Spertus Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Deepak L Bhatt; Kim A Eagle; E Magnus Ohman; Alan T Hirsch; Shinya Goto; Elizabeth M Mahoney; Peter W F Wilson; Mark J Alberts; Ralph D'Agostino; Chiau-Suong Liau; Jean-Louis Mas; Joachim Röther; Sidney C Smith; Geneviève Salette; Charles F Contant; Joseph M Massaro; Ph Gabriel Steg Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-08-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J G Jollis; E R DeLong; E D Peterson; L H Muhlbaier; D F Fortin; R M Califf; D B Mark Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-12-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David E Winchester; Andrew Kitchen; John C Brandt; Raman S Dusaj; Salim S Virani; Steven M Bradley; Leslee J Shaw; Rebecca J Beyth Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2015-04-13 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Emelia J Benjamin; Michael J Blaha; Stephanie E Chiuve; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Rajat Deo; Sarah D de Ferranti; James Floyd; Myriam Fornage; Cathleen Gillespie; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Lori Chaffin Jordan; Suzanne E Judd; Daniel Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Chris T Longenecker; Rachel H Mackey; Kunihiro Matsushita; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Mathew J Reeves; Matthew Ritchey; Carlos J Rodriguez; Gregory A Roth; Wayne D Rosamond; Comilla Sasson; Amytis Towfighi; Connie W Tsao; Melanie B Turner; Salim S Virani; Jenifer H Voeks; Joshua Z Willey; John T Wilkins; Jason Hy Wu; Heather M Alger; Sally S Wong; Paul Muntner Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Adam A Markovitz; Rob G Holleman; Timothy P Hofer; Eve A Kerr; Mandi L Klamerus; Jeremy B Sussman Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Matthew L Topel; Jeong Hwan Kim; Mahasin S Mujahid; Samaah M Sullivan; Yi-An Ko; Viola Vaccarino; Arshed A Quyyumi; Tené T Lewis Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Michael L O'Byrne; Andrew C Glatz; Lihai Song; Heather M Griffis; Marisa E Millenson; Matthew J Gillespie; Yoav Dori; Aaron G DeWitt; Christopher E Mascio; Jonathan J Rome Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Charles D Resor; Ashwin Nathan; Dean J Kereiakes; Robert W Yeh; Joseph M Massaro; Donald E Cutlip; P Gabriel Steg; Wen-Hua Hsieh; Laura Mauri Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 29.690