Coronary Angiography Utilization and Costs for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Patients in Turkey

Cardiology and Therapy

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 151-163

  Baser, Onur ^a   Burkan, Abdulkadir ^b   Baser, Erdem ^c   Koselerli, Rasim ^b   Ertugay, Emre ^b   Altinbas, Akif ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b Undersecretariat of Treasury   (Turkey)

^c CENTRAL BANK OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY   (Turkey)

^d DISKAPI YILDIRIM BEYAZIT TRAINING AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Angiography; Coronary artery bypass graft surgery; Coronary artery disease; Health care costs; Hospital quality; Turkey

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; COMORBIDITY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; EMERGENCY CARE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURVIVAL RATE; TURKEY (REPUBLIC); VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84908034813     PISSN: 21938261     EISSN: 21936544     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40119-013-0018-z     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. CABRI Trial Participants. First-year results of CABRI (coronary angioplasty versus bypass revascularisation investigation). Lancet. 1995;346: 1179-84.
2. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization (BARI) Investigators. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 1996;335: 217-25.
3. Braxton JH, Marrin CA, McGrath PD, Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group, et al. Mediastinitis and long-term survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;70: 2004-7.
4. Varnauskas E. Twelve-year follow-up of survival in the randomized European Coronary Surgery Study. N Engl J Med. 1988;319: 332-7.
5. Rogers WJ, Coggin CJ, Gersh BJ, et al. Ten-year follow-up of quality of life in patients randomized to receive medical therapy or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS). Circulation. 1990;82: 1647-58.
6. Hamon M, Lepage O, Malagutti P, et al. Diagnostic performance of 16- and 64-section spiral CT for coronary artery bypass graft assessment: meta-analysis. Radiology. 2008;247: 679-86.
7. Bernstein SJ, Laouri M, Hilborne LH, et al. Coronary angiography. USA: RAND Corporation, 1992. p. s118-s128.
8. McGlynn EA, Naylor CD, Anderson GM, et al. Comparison of the appropriateness of coronary angiography and coronary artery bypass graft surgery between Canada and New York State. JAMA. 1994;272: 934-40.
9. Bernstein SJ, Hilborne LH, Leape LL, et al. The appropriateness of use of coronary angiography in New York State. JAMA. 1993;269: 766-9.
10. Leape LL, Hilborne LH, Park RE, et al. The appropriateness of use of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in New York State. JAMA. 1993;269: 753-60.
11. Kennedy JW. Complications associated with cardiac catheterization and angiography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1982;8: 5-11.
12. Levit K, Smith C, Cowan C, Lazenby H, Sensenig A, Catlin A. Trends in U. S. health care spending, 2001. Health Aff (Millwoood). 2003;22: 154-64.
13. Lucas FL, DeLorenzo MA, Siewers AE, Wennberg DE. Temporal trends in the utilization of diagnostic testing and treatments for cardiovascular disease in the United States, 1993-2001. Circulation. 2006;113: 374-9.
14. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris D, Coffey R. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36: 8-27.
15. Baser O, Palmer L, Stephenson J. The estimation power of alternative comorbidity indices. Value Health. 2008;11: 946-55.
16. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127: 757-63.
17. Baser O. Too much ado about propensity score models? Comparing methods of propensity score matching. Value Health. 2006;9: 377-85.
18. Staiger DO, Dimick JB, Baser O, Fan Z, Birkmeyer JD. Empirically derived composite measures of surgical performance. Med Care. 2009;47: 226-33.
19. Dimick JB, Staiger DO, Baser O, Birkmeyer JD. Composite measures for predicting surgical mortality in the hospital. Health Aff. 2009;28: 1189-98.
20. Ayanian JZ, Epstein AM. Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 1991;325: 221-5.
21. Ayanian JZ, Udvarhelyi IS, Gatsonis CA, Pashos CL, Epstein AM. Racial differences in the use of revascularization procedures after coronary angiography. JAMA. 1993;269: 2642-6.
22. Goldberg KC, Hartz AJ, Jacobsen SJ, Krakauer H, Rimm AA. Racial and community factors influencing coronary artery bypass graft surgery rates for all 1986 Medicare patients. JAMA. 1992;267: 1473-7.
23. Steingart RM, Packer M, Hamm P, The Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Investigators, et al. Sex differences in the management of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 1991;325: 226-30.
24. Wenneker MB, Epstein AM. Racial inequalities in the use of procedures for patients with ischemic heart disease in Massachusetts. JAMA. 1989;261: 253-7.
25. Whittle J, Conigliaro J, Good CB, Lofgren RP. Racial differences in the use of invasive cardiovascular procedures in the Department of Veterans Affairs medical system. N Engl J Med. 1993;329: 621-7.
26. Fraker TD Jr, Fihn SD, Gibbons RJ, et al. 2007 chronic angina focused update of the ACC/AHA 2002 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 Writing Group to develop the focused update of the 2002 Guidelines for the management of patients with chronic stable angina. Circulation. 2007;116: 2762-72.
27. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. A Data Book: Health care spending and the Medicare program, June 2012. Washington, DC: MedPAC; 2007. http://www. medpac. gov/documents/Jun12DataBookEntireReport. pdf. Accessed August 18, 2012.
28. The Ministry of Health of Turkey. Health Transformation Programme in Turkey, Progress Report, September 2010. http://www. sb. gov. tr/EN/dosya/2-1253/h/healthtransformationprogrammeinturkey. pdf. Accessed May 25, 2012.
29. Paxton EW, Namba RS, Maletis GB, et al. A prospective study of 80, 000 total joint and 5000 anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in a community-based registry in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg. 2010;92: 117-32.
30. Jain N, Pietrobon R, Hocker S, Guller U, Shankar A, Higgins LD. The relationship between surgeon and hospital volume and outcomes for shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. 2004;86: 496-505.
31. Stanton T. Experience is a factor in scoliosis surgery outcomes. AAOSNow. 2011;5.
32. Baser O. Choosing propensity score matching over regression adjustment for causal inference: when, why and how it makes sense. J Med Econ. 2007;10: 379-91.
33. Rubin DB. Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: application to the tobacco litigation. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2001;2: 169-88.
34. Glynn RJ, Schneeweiss S, Wang PS, Levin R, Avorn J. Selective prescribing led to overestimation of the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59: 819-28.
35. Gu XS, Rosenbaum PR. Comparison of multivariate matching methods: structures, distances, and algorithms. J Comput Graph Stat. 1993;2: 405-20.
36. Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15: 361-87.
37. Cepeda MS. Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158: 280-7.
38. King G, Zeng L. Estimating risk and rate levels, ratios and differences in case-control studies. Stat Med. 2002;21: 1409-27.
39. Wooldridge J. Inverse probability weighted estimation for general missing data problems. J Econometrics. 2007;141: 1281-301.
40. Wooldridge JM. Introductory econometrics: a modern approach. 3rd ed. Mason: Thomson/South-Western; 2006. p. s220-s241.
41. Shah BR, Laupacis A, Hux JE, Austin PC. Propensity score methods gave similar results to traditional regression modeling in observational studies: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58: 550-9.
42. Stürmer T, Joshi M, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Rothman KJ, Schneeweiss S. A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59: 437-47.
43. Wooldridge JM. Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2002. p. 752.
44. Baser O. Too much ado about instrumental variable approach: is the cure worse than the disease? Value Health. 2009;12: 1201-9.
45. Staiger D, Stock JH. Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica (Evanston, Ill). 1997;65: 557-86.