WinsLosses and ErrorsTies: Quality of Care for Acute Myocardial Infarction in the VA Health Care Sys - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 15
About This Presentation
Title:

WinsLosses and ErrorsTies: Quality of Care for Acute Myocardial Infarction in the VA Health Care Sys

Description:

VA HSR&D Career Development Award Program RCD 95-306; RWJ Foundation Generalist ... for AMI may indicate a hospital's or system's ability to deliver highly skilled, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:43
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: laurapete
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: WinsLosses and ErrorsTies: Quality of Care for Acute Myocardial Infarction in the VA Health Care Sys


1
Wins/Losses and Errors/TiesQuality of Care for
Acute Myocardial Infarction in the VA Health Care
System
  • Laura A. Petersen, M.D., M.P.H.1
  • Sharon-Lise T. Normand, PhD2
  • Barbara J. McNeil, MD, PhD2
  • 1 Houston Center for Quality of Care and
    Utilization Studies,
  • an HSRD Center of Excellence
  • 2Harvard Department of Health Care Policy
  • Supported by VA HSRD IIR 94-054
  • VA HSRD Career Development Award Program RCD
    95-306 RWJ Foundation Generalist Physician
    Faculty Scholar Award Program
  • AHRQ RO1-HS08071

2
Background
  • Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a common,
    costly, and clinically significant condition, and
    represents a signal event in the natural history
    of ischemic heart disease
  • Appropriate quality of care for AMI improves
    survival
  • Quality of care for AMI may indicate a hospitals
    or systems ability to deliver highly skilled,
    specialized acute medical care

3
Goals
  • To compare process of care and outcomes after
    acute myocardial infarction in VA and non-VA
    hospitals, controlling for differing patient
    characteristics

4
Methods - Patient Samples
  • Age gt 65
  • Male
  • Clinically confirmed discharge diagnosis of acute
    myocardial infarction
  • 29,249 FFS Medicare patients from 1,530 non-VA
    acute care hospitals in CA, FL, MA, NY, OH, PA,
    and TX
  • Random sample of 2,486 patients from 81 VA
    hospitals nationwide

5
Wins
  • Petersen LA, Normand SL, Leape LL, McNeil BJ.
    Comparison of use medications after acute
    myocardial infarction in the Veterans Health
    Administration and Medicare. Circulation,
    2001104(24)2898-2904.

6
Use of Thrombolytic Therapy at Arrival or Aspirin
at Discharge in VA Relative to Medicare

All comparisons significant at plt0.05
7
Use of ACE Inhibitors or Beta-Blockers at
Discharge in VA Relative to Medicare

plt0.05 comparison NS
8
Losses and Errors
  • Petersen LA, Normand SL, Leape LL, McNeil BJ.
    Regionalization and the underuse of angiography
    in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System as
    compared with a fee-for-service system. N Engl J
    Med 2003 3482209-17.

9
Age-Adjusted Rates of Cardiac Procedures Among
ACC Class I Patients
RR 0.72 95 CI (0.67-0.78)
RR 0.82 95 CI (0.78-0.87)


Diagnostic angiography within 90 days after
index admission. Procedures within 90 days among
patients who underwent angiography within 90 days
after index admission.
10
Summary
  • Differences in underuse not eliminated by
    adjustment for patient characteristics and
    clustering
  • Differences eliminated by adjustment for
    procedure availability in the regionalized system

11
Ties
  • Petersen LA, Normand SL, Daley J, McNeil BJ.
    Outcome of myocardial infarction in Veterans
    Health Administration patients as compared with
    Medicare patients. N Engl J Med
    20003431934-41.

12
Adjusted Odds of Mortality Medicare Relative to
VA(Using full sample 29,249 Medicare and 2,486
VA)
  • Logistic Regression OR 95CI
  • 30-day 0.93 (0.81-1.07) c0.800
  • 1-year 0.93 (0.83-1.05) c0.799
  • Adjusting for 30 sociodemographic, clinical and
    hospital variables cArea under ROC curve
  • Results confirmed with propensity score adjustment

13
Summary
  • Wins VA patients were equally likely (in the
    case of beta-blockers) or more likely (in the
    case of thrombolytic therapy, ACE inhibitors, or
    aspirin) than Medicare patients to receive
    medications of known benefit after AMI
  • Losses/Errors Rates of use of angiography and
    cardiac revascularization procedures were
    significantly lower in the VA than in Medicare,
    even among groups where angiography was deemed
    clinically needed

14
Summary and Conclusions (2)
  • However, once admitting hospital procedure
    availability was controlled for, there was no
    difference in angiography use between patients
    cared for in VA and Medicare
  • The findings suggest that underuse of angiography
    could be remedied by changes in policy regarding
    availability of angiography services and
    regionalization of cardiac technology

15
Summary and Conclusions (3)
  • Ties VA patients were somewhat sicker than
    Medicare patients. Yet, we found no significant
    differences in 30-day or 1-year mortality between
    Medicare and VA AMI patients
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com