Cardiac procedure use and outcomes in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction in the United States and Quebec, Canada, 1988 to 1994

Medical Care

Volumn 41, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 813-822

  Pilote, Louise ^a   Saynina, Olga ^b   Lavoie, Frederic ^a   Mcclellan, Mark ^b,c  

^a MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH   (United States)

^c STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Acute myocardial infarction; Angioplasty; Catheterization; Coronary artery bypass surgery; Elderly; Mortality; Population studies; Trend analysis

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CANADA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; MORTALITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

AGED; ANGIOPLASTY, TRANSLUMINAL, PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; MYOCARDIAL REVASCULARIZATION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; QUEBEC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0038681261     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200307000-00005     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Tu JV, Pashos CL, Naylor CD, et al. Use of cardiac procedures and outcomes in elderly patients with myocardial infarction in the United States and Canada. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1500-1505.
2. Rouleau JL, Moye LA, Pfeffer MA, et al. A comparison of management patterns after acute myocardial infarction in Canada and the United States. N Engl J Med 1993;328:779-784.
3. Mark DB, Naylor CD, Hlatky MA, et al. Medical resource use and quality of life outcomes following acute myocardial infarction in Canada versus the United States: the Canadian-US GUSTO subsrudy. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1130-1135.
4. Batchelor WB, Peterson ED, Mark DB, et al. A comparison of U.S. and Canadian cardiac catheterization practices in detecting severe coronary artery disease after myocardial infarction: efficiency, yield and long-term implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34:12-19.
5. Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development Health Statistics 99. Paris, France: OECD; 2000.
6. Udvarhelyi IS, Gatsonis C, Epstein AM, et al. Acute myocardial infarction in the Medicare population: process of care and clinical outcomes. JAMA 1992;268:2530-2536.
7. Iglehart JK. Revisiting the Canadian health care system. N Engl J Med 2000;342:2007-2012.
8. Levy A, Tamblyn RM, Fitchett D, et al. Coding accuracy of hospital discharge data for elderly survivors of myocardial infarction. Can J Cardiol 1999;15:1277-1282.
9. McClellan M, McNeil BJ, Newhouse JP. Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction reduce mortality? analysis using instrumental variables. JAMA 1994;272:859-866.
10. Pilote L, Lavoie F, Ho V, et al. Changes in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction in Quebec accompanied by improved survival rates: 1988 through 1995. Can Med Assoc J 2000;163:31-36.
11. Ghali WA, Hall RE, Rosen AK, et al. Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:273-278.
12. Greene WH. Econometric Analysis. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2000:298.
13. Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences. The Quality of Medical Care in the United States: Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care 1999. Chicago, IL: American Hospital Association; 1999.
14. McClellan M, Noguchi H. The Validity of Instrumental Variables Estimates of Treatment Effects: Acute Myocardial Infarction in the Elderly. NBER Working Paper Series. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2000.