Effect of patient-specific ratings vs conventional guidelines on investigation decisions in angina: Appropriateness of Referral and Investigation in Angina (ARIA) Trial

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 167, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 195-202

  Junghans, Cornelia ^a   Feder, Gene ^b   Timmis, Adam D ^c   Eldridge, Sandra ^b   Sekhri, Neha ^b   Black, Nick ^d   Shekelle, Paul ^e   Hemingway, Harry ^a  

^a ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c BARTS HEALTH NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^d LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^e VA GREATER LOS ANGELES HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR; NITRATE;

ANGINA PECTORIS; ANGIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT REFERRAL; PHYSICIAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VIGNETTE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGINA PECTORIS; ANGIOGRAPHY; CARDIOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; EXERCISE TEST; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; PRACTICE GUIDELINES;

EID: 33846446391     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: 15383679     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.167.2.195     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
2. Office of Quality and Performance. Clinical practice guidelines . 2005. http://www.oqp.med.va.gov/cpg/cpg.htm. Accessed October 29, 2006.
3. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. The Guideline Development Process: Information for National Collaborating Centres and Guideline Development Groups. London, England: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2001.
4. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:iii-iv, 1-72.
5. Woolf SH. Practice guidelines: a new reality in medicine, III: impact on patient care. Arch Intern Med. 1993;153:2646-2655.
6. Sheldon TA, Cullum N, Dawson D, et al. What's the evidence that NICE guidance has been implemented? results from a national evaluation using time series analysis, audit of patients' notes, and interviews. BMJ. 2004;329:e999.
7. Eccles M, McColl E, Steen N, et al. Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2002;325:e941.
8. Hemingway H, McCallum A, Shipley M, Manderbacka K, Martikainen P, Keskimäki I. Incidence and prognostic implications of stable angina pectoris among women and men. JAMA. 2006;295:1404-1411.
9. McLaughlin TJ, Soumerai SB, Willison DJ, et al. Adherence to national guidelines for drug treatment of suspected acute myocardial infarction: evidence for undertreatment in women and the elderly. Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:799-805.
10. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ. 2005;330:e765.
11. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methods User's Manual. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND Corp; 2001.
12. Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus TR, Lee M. Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA. 2000;283:1715-1722.
13. Gibbons RJ, Chatterjee K, Daley J, et al. ACC/AHA/ACP-ASIM guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:2092-2197.
14. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology. Management of stable angina pectoris: recommendations of the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 1997;18:394-413.
15. Goldman L, Hashimoto B, Cook EF, Loscalzo A. Comparative reproducibility and validity of systems for assessing cardiovascular functional class: advantages of a new specific activity scale. Circulation. 1981;64:1227-1234.
16. Pryor DB, Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Califf RM, Rosati RA. Estimating the likelihood of significant coronary artery disease. Am J Med. 1983;75:771-780.
17. Timmis AD, Feder G, Hemingway H. Prognosis of stable angina pectoris: why we need larger population studies with higher endpoint resolution. Heart. In press.
18. Hemingway H, Shipley M, Britton A, Page M, MacFarlane P, Marmot M. Prognosis of angina with and without a diagnosis: 11 year follow up in the Whitehall II prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2003;327:e895.
19. Sekhri N, Feder G, Junghans C, Hemingway HJ, Timmis AD. How effective are rapid access chest pain clinics? prognosis of incident angina and non-cardiac chest pain in 8762 consecutive patients. Heart. doi:10.1136/hrt.2006. 090894.
20. Quintana JM, Escobar A, Arostegui I, et al. Health-related quality of life and appropriateness of knee or hip joint replacement. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:220-226.
21. Hemingway H, Crook AM, Feder G, et al. Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:645-654.
22. Sox HC Jr, Hickam DH, Marton KI, et al. Using the patient's history to estimate the probability of coronary artery disease: a comparison of primary care and referral practices. Am J Med. 1990;89:7-14.
23. Shekelle PG, Kravitz RL, Beart J, Marger M, Wang M, Lee M. Are nonspecific practice guidelines potentially harmful? a randomized comparison of the effect of nonspecific versus specific guidelines on physician decision making. Health Serv Res. 2000;34:1429-1448.
24. Verstappen W, ter Riet G, van der Weijden T, Hermsen J, Grol R. Variation in requests for imaging investigations by general practitioners: a multilevel analysis. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:25-30.
25. Kerry S, Oakeshott P, Dundas D, Williams J. Influence of postal distribution of the Royal College of Radiologists' guidelines, together with feedback on radiological referral rates, on X-ray referrals from general practice: a randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract. 2000;17:46-52.
26. Freeman VG, Rathore SS, Weinfurt KP, Schulman KA, Sulmasy DP. Lying for patients: physician deception of third-party payers. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:2263-2270.
27. Sirovich BE, Gottlieb DJ, Welch HG, Fisher ES. Variation in the tendency of primary care physicians to intervene. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:2252-2256.
28. Tierney WM, Overhage JM, Murray MD, et al. Can computer-generated evidence-based care suggestions enhance evidence-based management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? a randomized, controlled trial. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:477-497.
29. Boyd CM, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA. 2005;294:716-724.