Literature DB >> 8250458

Scorecard cardiovascular medicine. Its impact and future directions.

E J Topol1, R M Califf.   

Abstract

Public release of operator-specific data for cardiovascular procedures has set a new precedent, introducing the "scorecard" era. Justification exists for public disclosure, but the mechanics of appropriate data release are complex from a clinical, statistical, and logistic standpoint. Scorecard medicine may appropriately promote regionalization of medical centers and consolidation of services, but unless the process is directed effectively, it may impair the development of new treatments because of a more restrictive clinical practice environment. We propose revamping our current system to facilitate rapid and accurate access to outcome data in the local practice environment so that improvement in practice occurs on a voluntary basis rather than in response to punitive restrictions. A rational plan needs to be developed for dealing with high-risk patients, perhaps through compensation in regression models used to calculate expected outcomes, and for the start-up of novice physicians. Special provisions are needed to promote clinical research. Before procedures are done, it would be ideal to provide a full disclosure informed consent, whereby the physician reports operator-specific data and the patient's decision-making process is facilitated. Overall, appropriate implementation of scorecards could ultimately lead to a substantial improvement in the quality of U.S. cardiovascular medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8250458     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-120-1-199401010-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  13 in total

Review 1.  Advances in the medical management of acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  C P Cannon
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  Public disclosure of performance data: learning from the US experience.

Authors:  M N Marshall; P G Shekelle; S Leatherman; R H Brook
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-03

3.  Coronary artery bypass grafting in Canada: hospital mortality rates, 1992-1995.

Authors:  W A Ghali; H Quan; R Brant
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-10-20       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Toward improved coronary artery revascularization: is this as good as it gets?

Authors:  P W Armstrong
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-08-11       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 5.  Maintaining standards in British and Canadian medicine: the developing role of the regulatory body.

Authors:  L Southgate; D Dauphinee
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-02-28

Review 6.  Public reporting of PCI outcomes: for better or for worse.

Authors:  Brian J Potter; Robert W Yeh; Duane S Pinto
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.931

7.  The need for accurate risk-adjusted measures of outcome in surgery. Lessons learned through coronary artery bypass.

Authors:  B P Griffith; B G Hattler; R L Hardesty; R L Kormos; S M Pham; H T Bahnson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Practising medicine and keeping score: report cards for doctors.

Authors:  S Zats
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 1.891

9.  Hypertension control, 1994.

Authors:  S Shea
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Are high-quality cardiac surgeons less likely to operate on high-risk patients compared to low-quality surgeons? Evidence from New York State.

Authors:  Laurent G Glance; Andrew Dick; Dana B Mukamel; Yue Li; Turner M Osler
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.