Comparing performance between coronary intervention centres requires detailed case-mix adjusted analysis

Journal of Public Health

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 177-184

  Denvir, M A ^a,b   Lee, A J ^b   Rysdale, J ^a   Prescott, R J ^b,e   Eteiba, H ^c   Walker, A ^d   Starkey, I R ^a   Pell, J P ^c  

^a WESTERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c GLASGOW ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^e Department of Medical Statistics ^*

Author keywords

Case mix; Cost; Outcome; Percutaneous coronary intervention

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANGINA PECTORIS; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY STENT; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORTALITY; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STENT; SURVIVAL RATE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 3543085044     PISSN: 17413842     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdh142     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Fox KA, Goodman SG, Klein W, et al. Management of acute coronary syndromes. Variations in practice and outcome; findings from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Eur Heart J 2002; 23(15): 1177-1189.
2. Maier W, Enderlin MF, Bonzel T, et al. Audit and quality control in angioplasty in Europe: procedural results of the AQUA Study 1997: assessment of 250 randomly selected coronary interventions performed in 25 centres of five European countries. AQUA Study Group, Nucleus Clinical Issues, Working Group Coronary Circulation, of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 1999; 20(17): 1261-1270.
3. Street A. Confident about efficiency measurement in the NHS? Kings Fund: Healthcare UK, Spring 2000.
4. Department of Health The NHS plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. London: Department of Health, 2000.
5. Dr Foster. Dr Foster good hospital guide. London: Vermillion, 2002.
6. Marshall MN, Hiscock J, Sibbald B. Attitudes to the public release of comparative information on the quality of general practice care: qualitative study. Br Med J 2002; 325: 1278-1281.
7. Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, Brook RH. Dying to know: public release of comparative data in health care. London: Nuffield Trust, 2000.
8. Goldhill DR, Withington PS. The effect of casemix adjustment on mortality as predicted by APACHE II. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22(5): 415-419.
9. Hofer TP, Hayward RA. Identifying poor-quality hospitals. Can hospital mortality rates detect quality problems for medical diagnoses? Med Care 1996; 34(8): 737-753.
10. Pine MB, Morgan DD, Beller RH. Potential effectiveness of comparative casemix-corrected adverse outcome rates as quality monitors in a simulated hospital system. Med Decis Making 1989; 9(2): 104-115.
11. Kerr GD, Dunt D, Gordon IR. Effect of casemix funding on outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with suspected unstable angina. Med J Aust 1998; 168(2): 57-60.
12. Basinski AS, Almond DG, James RG, Naylor CD. Rating the urgency of coronary angiography: results of an expert panel process. Ontario Coronary Angiography Panel. Can J Cardiol 1993; 9(4): 313-321.
13. Scottish Health Service Costs (year ended 31st March 1999). Information and Statistics Division, Scottish Executive. Available at http://www.show.scot. nhs.uk/isd/.
14. Carstairs V, Morris R. Deprivation and health in Scotland. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1991.
15. George CJ, Baim DS, Brinker JA, et al. One-year follow-up of the Stent Restenosis (STRESS I) Study. Am J Cardiol 1998; 81(7): 860-865.
16. Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994; 331(8): 489-495.
17. Wong P, Lau K, Lim Y, Oesterle SN. Stent placement for non-STRESS/BENESTENT lesions: a critical review. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000; 51: 223-233.
18. Kishi K, Hiasa Y, Suzuki N, et al. Predictors of recurrent restenosis after coronary stenting: an analysis of 197 patients. J Invasive Cardiol 2002; 14(4): 187-191.
19. Elezi S, Kastrati A, Neumman SJ, Hadamitzky M, Dirscinger J, Schomig A. Vessel size and longterm outcome after coronary stent placement. Circulation 1998; 98: 1875-1880.
20. Topol EJ. Economics and quality of care for patients with acute coronary syndromes: the impending crisis. Clin Cardiol 2002 25 [11 Suppl 1]: 19-115.
21. Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin MR. Improving outcomes of coronary aretery by-pass surgery in New York state. JAMA 1994; 271: 761-766.
22. Ghali WA, Ash AS, Hall RE, Moskowitz MA. Statewide quality improvement initiatives and mortality after cardiac surgery. JAMA 1997; 277(5): 379-382.
23. Schneider EC, Epstein AM. Influence of cardiac-surgery performance reports on referral practices and access to care: a survey of cardiovascular specialists. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 251-256.