Advertisement






Click here for more guidelines.
CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009; 53:825-830, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.11.034
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Resnic, F. S.
Right arrow Articles by Welt, F. G.P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Resnic, F. S.
Right arrow Articles by Welt, F. G.P.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

REVIEW AND COMMENTARY

The Public Health Hazards of Risk Avoidance Associated With Public Reporting of Risk-Adjusted Outcomes in Coronary Intervention

Frederic S. Resnic, MD, MSc* and Frederick G.P. Welt, MD, MSc

Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

Manuscript received March 27, 2008; revised manuscript received October 1, 2008, accepted November 24, 2008.

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Frederic S. Resnic, Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02115 (Email: fresnic{at}partners.org).

Public reporting of risk-adjusted outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures has been mandated in New York State for more than a decade. During that time there has been a significant decline in the unadjusted mortality after such procedures. Massachusetts joined New York in 2003 as only the second state to require case level reporting of every coronary interventional procedure performed. In this review, we explore the differences in the populations reported by the 2 states and consider possible risks of public reporting of clinical outcomes after PCI procedures, including the risk of increasing conservatism in the treatment of the sickest patients. We offer a conceptual framework to understand the potential risk-averse behavior of interventional cardiologists subject to public reporting, and offer several proposals to counteract this potential deleterious effect of reporting programs.

Key Words: percutaneous coronary intervention • quality assurance • cardiogenic shock

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting
  PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention
  STEMI = ST-elevation myocardial infarction


Related Article

Inside This Issue
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2009 53: A35. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NEJMHome page
P. Hartzband and J. Groopman
Keeping the Patient in the Equation -- Humanism and Health Care Reform
N. Engl. J. Med., August 6, 2009; 361(6): 554 - 555.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
R. M. Califf and E. D. Peterson
Public reporting of quality measures what are we trying to accomplish?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 10, 2009; 53(10): 831 - 833.
[Full Text] [PDF]



 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement