CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations Microthrombi As A Major Cause of Cardiac Injury in COVID-19: A Pathologic Study Transcatheter Mitral-Valve Repair in Patients with Heart Failure Relation of prior statin and anti-hypertensive use to severity of disease among patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American Heart Association’s COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Better Prognosis After Complete Revascularization Using Contemporary Coronary Stents in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Cardiovascular Biomarkers and Imaging in Older Adults: JACC Council Perspectives Radial Versus Femoral Access for Coronary Interventions Across the Entire Spectrum of Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials When high‐volume PCI operators in high‐volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals—Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes? Optimal Stenting Technique for Complex Coronary Lesions Intracoronary Imaging-Guided Pre-Dilation, Stent Sizing, and Post-Dilation Discharge Against Medical Advice After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States

Original Research2018 Oct 1;92(4):644-650.

JOURNAL:Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

When high‐volume PCI operators in high‐volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals—Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes?

Lu TH, Li ST, Yin WH et al. Keywords: percutaneous coronary intervention; utilization; volume

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this quasi-experimental study was to examine whether high-volume percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) operators still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes when they moved to lower volume hospitals.


BACKGROUND - Systematic reviews have indicated that high-volume PCI operators and hospitals have higher quality outcomes. However, little is known on whether high PCI volume and high quality outcomes are mainly due to operator characteristics (i.e., skill and experience) and is portable across organizations or whether it is due to hospital characteristics (i.e., equipment, team, and management system) and is less portable.


METHODS - We used Taiwan National Health Insurance claims data 2000-2012 to identify 98 high-volume PCI operators, 10 of whom moved from one hospital to another during the study period. We compared the PCI volume, risk-adjusted mortality ratio, and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) ratio before and after moving.


RESULTS - Of the 10 high-volume operators who moved, 6 moved from high- to moderate- or low-volume hospitals, with median annual PCI volumes (interquartile range) of 130 (117-165) in prior hospitals and 54 (46-84) in subsequent hospitals (the hospital the operator moved to), and the remaining 4 moved from high to high-volume hospitals, with median annual PCI volumes (interquartile range) of 151 (133-162) in prior hospitals and 193 (178-239) in subsequent hospitals. No significant differences were observed in the risk-adjusted mortality ratios and MACE ratios between high-volume operators and matched controls before and after moving.


CONCLUSIONS - High-volume operators cannot maintain high volume when they moved from high to moderate or low-volume hospitals; however, the quality of care is maintained. High PCI volume and high-quality outcomes are less portable and more hospital bound.