Patient-, Clinician-, and Institution-level Variation in Inotrope Use for Cardiac Surgery: A Multicenter Observational Analysis

Author:

Mathis Michael R.1ORCID,Janda Allison M.2,Kheterpal Sachin3,Schonberger Robert B.4,Pagani Francis D.5,Engoren Milo C.6,Mentz Graciela B.7,Shook Douglas C.8,Muehlschlegel Jochen D.9,Cassidy Ruth10,Clark David J.11,Colquhoun Douglas A.10,Freundlich Robert E.12,Jewell Elizabeth S.10,

Affiliation:

1. 1Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Computational Bioinformatics, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

2. 2Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

3. 3Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

4. 4Department of Anesthesiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

5. 5Department of Cardiac Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

6. 6Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

7. 7Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

8. 8Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

9. 9Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

10. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School

11. Department of Anesthesiology, Stanford University

12. Department of Anesthesiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Abstract

Background Conflicting evidence exists regarding the risks and benefits of inotropic therapies during cardiac surgery, and the extent of variation in clinical practice remains understudied. Therefore, the authors sought to quantify patient-, anesthesiologist-, and hospital-related contributions to variation in inotrope use. Methods In this observational study, nonemergent adult cardiac surgeries using cardiopulmonary bypass were reviewed across a multicenter cohort of academic and community hospitals from 2014 to 2019. Patients who were moribund, receiving mechanical circulatory support, or receiving preoperative or home inotropes were excluded. The primary outcome was an inotrope infusion (epinephrine, dobutamine, milrinone, dopamine) administered for greater than 60 consecutive min intraoperatively or ongoing upon transport from the operating room. Institution-, clinician-, and patient-level variance components were studied. Results Among 51,085 cases across 611 attending anesthesiologists and 29 hospitals, 27,033 (52.9%) cases received at least one intraoperative inotrope, including 21,796 (42.7%) epinephrine, 6,360 (12.4%) milrinone, 2,000 (3.9%) dobutamine, and 602 (1.2%) dopamine (non–mutually exclusive). Variation in inotrope use was 22.6% attributable to the institution, 6.8% attributable to the primary attending anesthesiologist, and 70.6% attributable to the patient. The adjusted median odds ratio for the same patient receiving inotropes was 1.73 between 2 randomly selected clinicians and 3.55 between 2 randomly selected institutions. Factors most strongly associated with increased likelihood of inotrope use were institutional medical school affiliation (adjusted odds ratio, 6.2; 95% CI, 1.39 to 27.8), heart failure (adjusted odds ratio, 2.60; 95% CI, 2.46 to 2.76), pulmonary circulation disorder (adjusted odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.58 to 1.87), loop diuretic home medication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.42 to 1.69), Black race (adjusted odds ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.68), and digoxin home medication (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.86). Conclusions Variation in inotrope use during cardiac surgery is attributable to the institution and to the clinician, in addition to the patient. Variation across institutions and clinicians suggests a need for future quantitative and qualitative research to understand variation in inotrope use affecting outcomes and develop evidence-based, patient-centered inotrope therapies. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3