Literature DB >> 8948565

Variation among hospitals in coronary-angiography practices and outcomes after myocardial infarction in a large health maintenance organization.

J V Selby1, B H Fireman, R J Lundstrom, B E Swain, A F Truman, C C Wong, E S Froelicher, H V Barron, M A Hlatky.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Wide geographic variation in the use of coronary angiography after myocardial infarction has been documented internationally and within the United States. An associated variation in clinical outcomes has not been consistently demonstrated.
METHODS: We assessed the risk of death from heart disease and of any heart disease event (death, reinfarction, or rehospitalization) over a follow-up period of one to four years in 6851 patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction at 16 Kaiser Permanente hospitals from 1990 through 1992. The percentage of patients who underwent angiography within three months after infarction ranged from 30 to 77 percent. We selected a subcohort of 1109 patients from three hospitals with higher rates of angiography and four with lower rates for a record review to assess the severity of infarction, the number of coexisting conditions, treatments received, and the appropriateness and necessity of angiography, using established criteria.
RESULTS: The rates of angiography were inversely related to the risk of death from heart disease (P= 0.03) and the risk of heart disease events (P<0.001) among the 16 hospitals after adjustment for age, sex, race, coexisting conditions, and the location of the infarction (subendocardial vs. transmural). In the subcohort, 440 patients met criteria indicating that angiography was necessary and 669 did not. Among the former, patients treated at hospitals with higher rates of angiography had a lower risk of death and of any heart disease event than those treated at hospitals with lower rates (hazard ratios, 0.67 and 0.72, respectively). Among the latter, the apparent benefits of being treated at hospitals with higher angiography rates were smaller (hazard ratios, 0.85 to 0.90 for death and any heart disease event, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: During the one to four years after myocardial infarction, patients treated at hospitals with higher rates of angiography had more favorable outcomes than those treated at hospitals with lower rates. This association was stronger among patients for whom published criteria indicated that angiography was necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8948565     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199612193352506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  40 in total

1.  New Zealand and United Kingdom experiences with the RAND modified Delphi approach to producing angina and heart failure criteria for quality assessment in general practice.

Authors:  S A Buetow; G D Coster
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-12

2.  Acute myocardial infarction in Canada: improvement with time.

Authors:  A Dodek
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-07-11       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Angioplasty, bypass surgery or medical treatment: how should we decide?

Authors:  J P Pell; M A Denvir
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.994

4.  Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care.

Authors:  S M Campbell; J Braspenning; A Hutchinson; M Marshall
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2002-12

Review 5.  Reasons and implications of agreements and disagreements between coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Manish Motwani; Mahsaw Motlagh; Anuj Gupta; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  Cost-sharing for emergency care and unfavorable clinical events: findings from the safety and financial ramifications of ED copayments study.

Authors:  John Hsu; Mary Price; Richard Brand; G Thomas Ray; Bruce Fireman; Joseph P Newhouse; Joseph V Selby
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods.

Authors:  Thérèse A Stukel; Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; David A Alter; Daniel J Gottlieb; Marian J Vermeulen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Long-term Outcomes Associated With Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease.

Authors:  Nisha Bansal; Adam Szpiro; Kristi Reynolds; David H Smith; David J Magid; Jerry H Gurwitz; Frederick Masoudi; Robert T Greenlee; Grace H Tabada; Sue Hee Sung; Ashveena Dighe; Alan S Go
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  The hospitalist movement and the future of academic general internal medicine.

Authors:  R M Wachter; S Flanders
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Validation of an algorithm for categorizing the severity of hospital emergency department visits.

Authors:  Dustin W Ballard; Mary Price; Vicki Fung; Richard Brand; Mary E Reed; Bruce Fireman; Joseph P Newhouse; Joseph V Selby; John Hsu
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.