Yu-Chu Shen1,2, Renee Y Hsia3,4. 1. Graduate School of Defense Management, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, USA. 2. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA. 4. Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) require timely reperfusion, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) decreases morbidity and mortality. Regionalization of STEMI care has increased timeliness and use of PCI, but it is unknown whether benefits to regionalization depend on a community's distance from its nearest PCI center. We sought to determine whether STEMI regionalization benefits, measured by access to PCI centers, timeliness of treatment (same-day or in-hospital PCI), and mortality, differ by baseline distance to nearest PCI center. METHODS: Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences model, we examined access to PCI-capable hospitals, receipt of PCI either on the day of admission or during the care episode, and health outcomes for patients hospitalized from January 1, 2006, to September 30, 2015. RESULTS: Of 139,408 patients (2006 to 2015), 51% could reach the nearest PCI center in <30 minutes, and 49% required ≥30 minutes driving time. For communities with baseline access ≥30 minutes, regionalization increased the probability of admission to a PCI-capable hospital by 9.4% and also increased the likelihood of receiving same-day PCI (by 11.2%) and PCI during the hospitalization (by 7.4%). Patients living within 30 minutes did not accrue significant benefits (measured by admission to a PCI-capable hospital or receipt of PCI) from regionalization initiatives. Regionalization more than halved access disparities and completely eliminated treatment disparities between communities ≥30 minutes and communities <30 minutes from the nearest PCI hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Measured by likelihood of admission to a PCI-capable facility and receipt of PCI, benefits of STEMI regionalization in California accrued only to patients whose nearest PCI center was ≥30 minutes away. We found no mortality benefits of regionalization based on distance from PCI center. Our results suggest that policymakers focus STEMI regionalization efforts in communities that are not already well serviced by PCI-capable hospitals.
BACKGROUND: Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) require timely reperfusion, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) decreases morbidity and mortality. Regionalization of STEMI care has increased timeliness and use of PCI, but it is unknown whether benefits to regionalization depend on a community's distance from its nearest PCI center. We sought to determine whether STEMI regionalization benefits, measured by access to PCI centers, timeliness of treatment (same-day or in-hospital PCI), and mortality, differ by baseline distance to nearest PCI center. METHODS: Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences model, we examined access to PCI-capable hospitals, receipt of PCI either on the day of admission or during the care episode, and health outcomes for patients hospitalized from January 1, 2006, to September 30, 2015. RESULTS: Of 139,408 patients (2006 to 2015), 51% could reach the nearest PCI center in <30 minutes, and 49% required ≥30 minutes driving time. For communities with baseline access ≥30 minutes, regionalization increased the probability of admission to a PCI-capable hospital by 9.4% and also increased the likelihood of receiving same-day PCI (by 11.2%) and PCI during the hospitalization (by 7.4%). Patients living within 30 minutes did not accrue significant benefits (measured by admission to a PCI-capable hospital or receipt of PCI) from regionalization initiatives. Regionalization more than halved access disparities and completely eliminated treatment disparities between communities ≥30 minutes and communities <30 minutes from the nearest PCI hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Measured by likelihood of admission to a PCI-capable facility and receipt of PCI, benefits of STEMI regionalization in California accrued only to patients whose nearest PCI center was ≥30 minutes away. We found no mortality benefits of regionalization based on distance from PCI center. Our results suggest that policymakers focus STEMI regionalization efforts in communities that are not already well serviced by PCI-capable hospitals.
Authors: Timothy D Henry; Scott W Sharkey; M Nicholas Burke; Ivan J Chavez; Kevin J Graham; Christopher R Henry; Daniel L Lips; James D Madison; Katie M Menssen; Michael R Mooney; Marc C Newell; Wes R Pedersen; Anil K Poulose; Jay H Traverse; Barbara T Unger; Yale L Wang; David M Larson Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Seth W Glickman; Melissa A Greiner; Li Lin; Lesley H Curtis; Charles B Cairns; Christopher B Granger; Eric D Peterson Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2011-08-20 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: James G Jollis; Hussein R Al-Khalidi; Mayme L Roettig; Peter B Berger; Claire C Corbett; Shannon M Doerfler; Christopher B Fordyce; Timothy D Henry; Lori Hollowell; Zainab Magdon-Ismail; Ajar Kochar; James J McCarthy; Lisa Monk; Peter O'Brien; Thomas D Rea; Jay Shavadia; Jacqueline Tamis-Holland; B Hadley Wilson; Khaled M Ziada; Christopher B Granger Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Robert W Yeh; Stephen Sidney; Malini Chandra; Michael Sorel; Joseph V Selby; Alan S Go Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-06-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James G Jollis; Mayme L Roettig; Akinyele O Aluko; Kevin J Anstrom; Robert J Applegate; Joseph D Babb; Peter B Berger; David J Bohle; Sidney M Fletcher; J Lee Garvey; William R Hathaway; James W Hoekstra; Robert V Kelly; William T Maddox; Joseph R Shiber; F Scott Valeri; Bradley A Watling; B Hadley Wilson; Christopher B Granger Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-11-04 Impact factor: 56.272