Quality Management and Volume-Related Outcomes in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory

Cardiology Clinics

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 287-297

  Snider, Richard L ^a   Laskey, Warren K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; CLINICAL LABORATORY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART CATHETERIZATION LABORATORY; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; TRANSLUMINAL CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CORONARY DISEASE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMANS; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; WORKLOAD;

EID: 33744996279     PISSN: 07338651     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccl.2006.01.001     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Grant E., and Leavenworth R. Statistical quality control. 7th edition (1966), McGraw Hill, New York
2. Available at: http://www.ge.com/sixsigma/SixSigma/pdf. Accessed July 1, 2005.
3. Sones Jr. F.M. The Society for Cardiac Angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diag 4 (1978) 233-234
4. Hildner F.J. Quality is the only issue. Cathet Cardiovasc Diag 3 (1990) 216-217
5. Bashore T.M., Bates E.R., Berger P.B., et al. Cardiac catheterization laboratory standards: a report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (ACC/SCAI committee to develop an expert consensus document on catheterization laboratory standards). J Am Coll Cardiol 37 (2001) 2170-2214
6. Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. Monograph on quality management in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (1999), SCAI, Bethesda (MD)
7. Ellis S.G., Omoigui N., Bittl J.A., et al. Analysis and comparison of operator-specific outcomes in interventional cardiology: from a multi-center database of 4860 quality-controlled procedures. Circulation 93 (1996) 431-439
8. Hirshfeld Jr. J.W., Ellis S.G., Faxon D.P., et al. Recommendations for the assessment and maintenance of proficiency in coronary interventional procedures: statement of the American College of Cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 31 (1998) 722-743
9. Block P.C., Peterson E.C., Krone R., et al. Identification of variables needed to risk adjust outcomes of coronary interventions: evidence-based guidelines for efficient data collection. J Am Coll Cardiol 32 (1998) 275-282
10. Hannan E.L., and Wu C. Assessing quality and outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention: Choosing statistical models, outcomes, time periods and patient populations. Am Heart J 145 (2003) 571-574
11. Kizer J.R., Berlin J.A., Laskey W.K., et al. Limitations of current risk-adjustment models in the era of coronary stenting. Am Heart J 145 (2003) 683-692
12. Holmes D.R., Selzer F., Johnston J.M., et al. Modeling and risk prediction in the current era of interventional cardiology. Circulation 107 (2003) 1871-1876
13. Williams D.O., Holubkov R., Yeh W., et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in the current era compared with 1985-86: the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Registries. Circulation 102 (2000) 2945-2951
14. Lindsay J., Pinnow E.E., and Pichard A.D. Benchmarking operator performance in percutaneous coronary intervention: a novel approach using 30-day events. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv 52 (2001) 139-145
15. Laskey W.K., Selzer F., Jacobs A.K., et al. Importance of the post-discharge interval in assessing major adverse clinical event rates following percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 95 (2005) 1135-1139
16. Phillips K.A., Luft H.S., and Ritchie J.L. The association of hospital volumes of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with adverse outcomes, length of stay and charges in California. Med Care 33 (1995) 502-514
17. Hannan E.L., Racz M., Ryan T.J., et al. Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologists. JAMA 277 (1997) 892-898
18. Luft H.S., Bunker J.P., and Enthoven A.C. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med 301 (1979) 1364-1369
19. Hannan E.L., O'Donnell J.F., Kilburn Jr. H., et al. Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. JAMA 262 (1989) 503-510
20. Finlayson E.V., Goodney P.P., and Birkmeyer J.D. Hospital volume and operative mortality in cancer surgery: a National Study. Arch Surg 138 (2003) 882-890
21. Birkmeyer J.D., Siewers A.E., Finlayson E., et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 346 (2002) 1128-1137
22. Ritchie J.L., Phillips K.A., and Luft H.S. Coronary angioplasty: statewide experience in California. Circulation 88 (1993) 2735-2743
23. Jollis J.G., Peterson E.D., DeLong E.R., et al. The relation between the volume of coronary angioplasty procedures at hospitals treating Medicare beneficiaries and short-term mortality. N Engl J Med 331 (1994) 1625-1629
24. Jollis J.G., Peterson E.D., Nelson C.L., et al. Relationship between physician and hospital coronary angioplasty volume and outcome in elderly patients. Circulation 95 (1997) 2485-2491
25. Kimmel S.E., Berlin J.A., and Laskey W.K. The relationship between coronary angioplasty procedure volume and major complications. JAMA 274 (1995) 1137-1142
26. Hannan E.L., Racz M., Ryan T.J., et al. Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologist. JAMA 277 11 (1997) 892-898
27. Kimmel S.E., Localio A.R., Krone R.J., et al. The effects of contemporary use of coronary stents on in-hospital mortality. Registry Committee of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 37 2 (2001) 499-504
28. Maynard C., Wright S.M., Every N.R., et al. Comparison of outcomes of coronary stenting versus conventional coronary angioplasty in the department of veterans affairs medical centers. Am J Cardiol 87 (2001) 1240-1245
29. Use of a monoclonal antibody directed against the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor n high-risk coronary angioplasty. The EPIC Investigation. N Engl J Med 330 (1994) 956-961
30. McGrath P.D., Malenka D.J., Wennberg D.E., et al. Changing outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions. A study of 34,752 procedures in northern New England, 1990 to 1997. J Am Coll Cardiol 34 (1999) 674-680
31. Kastrati A., Neuman F.J., and Shomig A. Operator volume and outcome of patients undergoing coronary stent placement. J Am Coll Cardiol 32 (1998) 970-976
32. McGrath P.D., Wennberg D.E., Dickens J.D., et al. Relation between operator and hospital volume and outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of the coronary stent. JAMA 284 (2000) 3139-3144
33. Watanabe C.T., Maynard C., and Ritchie J.L. Short-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: effects of stenting and institutional volume shifts. Am Heart J 144 (2002) 309-314
34. Epstein A.J., Rathor S.S., Volpp K.G., et al. Hospital percutaneous coronary intervention volume and patient mortality, 1998 to 2000. Does the evidence support current procedure volume minimums?. J Am Coll Cardiol 43 (2004) 1755-1762
35. Harjai K.J., Berman A.D., Grines C.L., et al. Impact of interventionalist volume, experience, and board certification on coronary angioplasty outcomes in the era of stenting. Am J Cardiol 94 (2004) 421-426
36. Malenka D.J., McGrath P.D., Wennberg D.E., et al. The relationship between operator volume and outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions in high volume hospitals in 1994-1996. J Am Coll Cardiol 34 (1999) 1471-1480
37. Thiemann D.R., Coresh J., Oetgen W.J., et al. The association between hospital volume and survival after acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients. N Engl J Med 340 (1999) 1640-1648
38. Vakili B.A., Kaplan R., and Brown D.L. Volume-outcome relation for physicians and hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in New York State. Circulation 104 (2001) 2171-2176
39. Vakili B.A., and Brown D.L. Relation of total annual coronary angioplasty volume of physicians and hospitals on outcomes of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction (data from the 1995 Coronary Angioplasty Reporting System of the New York State Department of Health). Am J Cardiol 91 6 (2003) 726-728
40. Magid D.J., Calonge B.N., Rumsfeld J.S., et al. Relation between hospital primary angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute MI treated with primary angioplasty vs thrombolytic therapy. JAMA 284 (2000) 3131-3138
41. Canto J.G., Every N.R., Magid D.J., et al. The volume of primary angioplasty procedures and survival after acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 342 (2000) 1573-1580
42. Tsuchihashi M., Tsutsui H., Tada H., et al. Volume-outcome relation for hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Nationwide Japanese Registry. Circ J 68 (2004) 887-891
43. Ho V. Evolution of the volume-outcome relation for hospitals performing coronary angioplasty. Circulation 101 (2000) 1806-1811
44. Moscucci M., Share D., Kline-Rogers E., et al. The Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2) collaborative quality improvement initiative in percutaneous coronary interventions. J Interv Cardiol 15 (2002) 381-386