Hospital and Physician Variability in Revascularization Decisions and Outcomes for Patients With 3‐Vessel and Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: A Population‐Based Cohort Study

Author:

Wilson Todd123ORCID,James Matthew T.123ORCID,Southern Danielle4ORCID,Har Bryan53ORCID,Graham Michelle M.6ORCID,Brass Neil7,Bainey Kevin6ORCID,Fedak Paul W. M.53,Sajobi Tolulope T.23ORCID,Wilton Stephen B.253ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medicine University of Calgary Alberta Canada

2. Department of Community Health Sciences University of Calgary Alberta Canada

3. Libin Cardiovascular Institute, University of Calgary Alberta Canada

4. Centre for Health Informatics, Cumming School of Medicine University of Calgary Alberta Canada

5. Department of Cardiac Sciences University of Calgary Alberta Canada

6. Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute, University of Alberta Edmonton Canada

7. CKHui Heart Centre University of Alberta Alberta Canada

Abstract

Background Hospital‐ and physician‐level variation for selection of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with coronary artery disease has been associated with outcome differences. However, most studies excluded patients treated medically. Methods and Results From 2010 to 2019, adults with 3‐vessel or left main coronary artery disease at 3 hospitals (A, B, C) in Alberta, Canada, were categorized by treatment with medical therapy, percutaneous coronary intervention, or CABG. Multilevel regression models determined the proportion of variation in treatment attributable to patient, physician, and hospital factors, and survival models assessed outcomes including death and major adverse cardiovascular events over 5 years. Of 22 580 patients (mean age, 67 years; 80% men): 6677 (29%) received medical management, 9171 (41%) percutaneous coronary intervention, and 6732 (30%) CABG. Hospital factors accounted for 10.8% of treatment variation. In adjusted models (site A as reference), patients at sites B and C had 49% (95% CI, 44%–53%) and 43% (95% CI, 37%–49%) lower rates of medical therapy, respectively, and 31% (95% CI, 24%–38%) and 32% (95% CI, 24%–40%) lower rates of CABG. During 5.0 years median follow‐up, 3287 (14.6%) patients died, with no intersite mortality differences. There were no between‐site differences in acute coronary syndromes or stroke; patients at sites B and C had 24% lower risk (95% CI, 13%–34% and 11%–35%, respectively) of heart failure hospitalization. Conclusions Hospital‐level variation in selection of percutaneous coronary intervention, CABG, or medical therapy for patients with complex coronary artery disease was not associated with differences in 5‐year mortality rates. Research and quality improvement initiatives comparing revascularization practices should include medically managed patients.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

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