Hospital volume of throughput and periprocedural and medium-term adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention: Retrospective cohort study of all 17 417 procedures undertaken in Scotland, 1997-2003

Heart

Volumn 92, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 1667-1672

  Burton, K R ^b   Slack, R ^c   Oldroyd, K G ^d   Pell, A C H ^e   Flapan, A D ^f   Starkey, I R ^g   Eteiba, H ^h   Jennings, K P ⁱ   Northcote, R J ^j   Hillis, W Stewart ^d   Pell, Jill P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c NHS GREATER GLASGOW AND CLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^d WESTERN INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^e MONKLANDS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^f ROYAL INFIRMARY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^g WESTERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^h GLASGOW ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ ABERDEEN ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^j VICTORIA INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HOSPITAL CARE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

AGED; ANGIOPLASTY, TRANSLUMINAL, PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY; COHORT STUDIES; CORONARY DISEASE; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; FEMALE; HEALTH FACILITY SIZE; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SCOTLAND; WORKLOAD;

EID: 33750302935     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2005.086736     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Black N, Langham S, Petticrew M. Coronary revascularisation: why do rates vary geographically in the UK? J Epidemiol Community Health 1995;49:408-12.
2. Dawkins KD, Gershlick T, de Belder M, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention: recommendations for good practice and training. Heart 2005;91(suppl 6):vi1-27.
3. Phillips K, Luft H. The policy implications of using hospital and physician volumes as 'indicators' of quality of care in a changing health care environment. Int J Qual Health Care 1997;9:341-8.
4. McGrath P, Wennberg D, Dickens J, et al. Relation between operator and hospital volume and outcomes following percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of the coronary stent. JAMA 200, 284:3139-44.
5. Ho V. Certificate of need, volume, and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty outcomes. Am Heart J 2004;147:383-5.
6. Epstein A, Rathore S, Volpp K, 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 2004;43:1763-4.
7. Mukherjee D, Wainess R, Kimick J, et al. Variation in outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States and predictors of periprocedural mortality. Cardiology 2005;103:143-7.
8. Carey J, Danielsen B, Gold J, et al. Procedure rates and outcomes of coronary revascularization procedures in California and New York. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129:1276-82.
9. Jamal S, Shrive F, Ghali W, et al. In-hospital outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in Canada: 1992/3 to 2000/01. Can J Cardiol 2003;19:782-9.
10. Doucet M, Eisenberg M, Joseph L, et al. Effects of hospital volume on long-term outcomes after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty after acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2002;144:144-50.
11. Vakili B, Kaplan R, Brown D. Volume-outcome relation for physicians and hospitals performing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in New York state. Circulation 2001;104:2155-7.
12. Anon. Data quality assurance report on acute inpatient/day case data 2000-2002. NHS Scotland, Information & Statistics Division, January 2004. http://www.isdscotland.org/isd/files/SMR01%20National%20Report.pdf (accessed 19 Jul 2006).
13. Hirshfeld JJ, Ellis S, Faxon D. Recommendations for the assessment and maintenance of proficiency in coronary interventional procedures: statement of the American College of Cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31:722-43.
14. Kimmel S, Berlin J, Laskey W. The relationship between physician and hospital coronary angioplasty volume and major complications. JAMA 1995;274:1137-42.
15. Phillips K, Luft H, Ritchie J. The association of hospital volumes of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with adverse outcomes, length of stay, and charges in California. Med Care 1995;33:502-14.
16. Carstairs V, Morris R. Deprivation and health in Scotland. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1991.
17. Petersen S, Peto V, Scarborough P, et al. 2005 coronary heart disease statistics. British Heart Foundation, June 2005. http://www.heartstats.org/ datapage.asp?id = 5340 (accessed 19 Jul 2006).
18. Stewart S, Murphy N, Walker A, et al. The current cost of angina pectoris to the National Health Service in the UK. Heart 2003;89:848-53.
19. Gray H. Planning for coronary angioplasty: guidelines for training and continuing competence. Heart 1996;75:419-25.
20. Ho V. Learning and the evolution of medical technologies: the diffusion of coronary angioplasty. J Health Econ 2002;21:873-85.