Stephen W Waldo1, James M McCabe2, Cashel O'Brien1, Kevin F Kennedy3, Karen E Joynt4, Robert W Yeh5. 1. Department of Medicine, Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 3. Saint Luke's Mid-America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri. 4. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Medicine, Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: ryeh@partners.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Public reporting of procedural outcomes may create disincentives to provide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for critically ill patients. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the association between public reporting with procedural management and outcomes among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified all patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI in states with public reporting (Massachusetts and New York) and regionally comparable states without public reporting (Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) between 2005 and 2011. Procedural management and in-hospital outcomes were stratified by public reporting. RESULTS: Among 84,121 patients hospitalized with AMI, 57,629 (69%) underwent treatment in a public reporting state. After multivariate adjustment, percutaneous revascularization was performed less often in public reporting states than in nonreporting states (odds ratio [OR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67 to 0.96), especially among older patients (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.91), those with Medicare insurance (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.91), and those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.71) or concomitant cardiac arrest or cardiogenic shock (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.70). Overall, patients with AMI in public reporting states had higher adjusted in-hospital mortality rates (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.37) than those in nonreporting states. This was observed predominantly in patients who did not receive percutaneous revascularization in public reporting states (adjusted OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.50), whereas those undergoing the procedure had lower mortality (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Public reporting is associated with reduced percutaneous revascularization and increased in-hospital mortality among patients with AMI, particularly among patients not selected for PCI.
BACKGROUND: Public reporting of procedural outcomes may create disincentives to provide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for critically illpatients. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the association between public reporting with procedural management and outcomes among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified all patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI in states with public reporting (Massachusetts and New York) and regionally comparable states without public reporting (Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) between 2005 and 2011. Procedural management and in-hospital outcomes were stratified by public reporting. RESULTS: Among 84,121 patients hospitalized with AMI, 57,629 (69%) underwent treatment in a public reporting state. After multivariate adjustment, percutaneous revascularization was performed less often in public reporting states than in nonreporting states (odds ratio [OR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67 to 0.96), especially among older patients (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.91), those with Medicare insurance (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.91), and those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.71) or concomitant cardiac arrest or cardiogenic shock (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.70). Overall, patients with AMI in public reporting states had higher adjusted in-hospital mortality rates (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.37) than those in nonreporting states. This was observed predominantly in patients who did not receive percutaneous revascularization in public reporting states (adjusted OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.50), whereas those undergoing the procedure had lower mortality (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Public reporting is associated with reduced percutaneous revascularization and increased in-hospital mortality among patients with AMI, particularly among patients not selected for PCI.
Authors: Stephen W Waldo; Eric A Secemsky; Cashel O'Brien; Kevin F Kennedy; Eugene Pomerantsev; Thoralf M Sundt; Edward J McNulty; Benjamin M Scirica; Robert W Yeh Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Renato A Apolito; Mark A Greenberg; Mark A Menegus; April M Lowe; Lynn A Sleeper; Mark H Goldberger; Joshua Remick; Martha J Radford; Judith S Hochman Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2007-12-19 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Mary Ann Peberdy; Michael W Donnino; Clifton W Callaway; J Michael Dimaio; Romergryko G Geocadin; Chris A Ghaemmaghami; Alice K Jacobs; Karl B Kern; Jerrold H Levy; Mark S Link; Venu Menon; Joseph P Ornato; Duane S Pinto; Jeremy Sugarman; Demetris Yannopoulos; T Bruce Ferguson Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mauro Moscucci; Kim A Eagle; David Share; Dean Smith; Anthony C De Franco; Michael O'Donnell; Eva Kline-Rogers; Sandeep M Jani; David L Brown Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-06-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: J S Hochman; L A Sleeper; J G Webb; T A Sanborn; H D White; J D Talley; C E Buller; A K Jacobs; J N Slater; J Col; S M McKinlay; T H LeJemtel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-08-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rishi K Wadhera; Colin W O'Brien; Karen E Joynt Maddox; Kalon K L Ho; Duane S Pinto; Frederic S Resnic; Pinak B Shah; Robert W Yeh Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alexander T Sandhu; Shun Kohsaka; Jay Bhattacharya; William F Fearon; Robert A Harrington; Paul A Heidenreich Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Gregory B Auffenberg; Khurshid R Ghani; Zaojun Ye; Apoorv Dhir; Yuqing Gao; Brian Stork; David C Miller Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Jordan B Strom; James M McCabe; Stephen W Waldo; Duane S Pinto; Kevin F Kennedy; Dmitriy N Feldman; Robert W Yeh Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: Daniel M Blumenthal; Linda R Valsdottir; Yuansong Zhao; Changyu Shen; Ajay J Kirtane; Duane S Pinto; Fred S Resnic; Karen E Joynt Maddox; Jason H Wasfy; Roxana Mehran; Ken Rosenfield; Robert W Yeh Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: William Z Chancellor; J Hunter Mehaffey; Jared P Beller; Elizabeth D Krebs; Robert B Hawkins; Kenan Yount; Clifford E Fonner; Alan M Speir; Mohammed A Quader; Jeffrey B Rich; Leora T Yarboro; Nicholas R Teman; Gorav Ailawadi Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2019-01-26 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Lloyd W Klein; Kishore J Harjai; Fred Resnic; William S Weintraub; H Vernon Anderson; Robert W Yeh; Dmitriy N Feldman; Osvaldo S Gigliotti; Kenneth Rosenfeld; Peter Duffy Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 2.692