1 / 9

J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1462-68

The Impact of For-Profit Hospital Status on the Care and Outcomes of Patients with NSTEMI: Results From CRUSADE. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1462-68.

Download Presentation

J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1462-68

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Impact of For-Profit Hospital Status on the Care and Outcomes of Patients with NSTEMI: Results From CRUSADE J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1462-68 Bimal R. Shah, MD, Seth W. Glickman, MD, MBA, Li Liang, PhD, W. Brian Gibler, MD, E. Magnus Ohman, MD, Charles V. Pollack Jr., MA, MD, Matthew T. Roe, MD, MHS, Eric D. Peterson, MD, MPH

  2. BACKGROUND • Background: We sought to determine whether for-profit status influenced hospitals’ care or outcomes among non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients. • Objectives: While for-profit hospitals potentially have financial incentives to selectively care for younger, healthier patients, perform highly reimbursed procedures, reduce costs by limiting access to expensive medications, and encourage shorter inpatient length of stay, there are limited data available to investigate these issues objectively.

  3. METHODS • Using data from the CRUSADE initiative, we investigated whether for-profit status influenced hospitals’ patient case mix, care, or outcomes among 145,357 patients with NSTEMI treated between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2005 at 532 U.S. hospitals. • Impact of for-profit status on care and outcomes was analyzed overall and after adjustment for clinical and facility factors using generalized estimating equations regression modeling.

  4. RESULTS:Comparison of Patient Characteristics Data are presented as percentages except as indicated. *Presented as mean±standard deviation. †Known serum creatinine >2.0 mg/dL, calculated creatinine clearance <30 mL/min, or need for renal dialysis. BMI = body mass index; HMO = health maintenance organization; VAMC = Veterans Administration Medical Center; CAD = coronary artery disease; MI = myocardial infarction; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; CABG = coronary artery bypass graft; CHF = congestive heart failure.

  5. RESULTS:Comparison of Hospital Characteristics Data are presented as percentages except as indicated. *Membership in Council of Teaching Hospitals. †Presented as mean±standard deviation. PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention

  6. RESULTS:Comparison of Guideline-Based In-Hospital Therapy Use Data are presented as percentages except as indicated. OR = odds ratio; UFH = unfractionated heparin; LMWH = low molecular weight heparin; GP = glycoprotein; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; CABG = coronary artery bypass graft.

  7. RESULTS:Comparison of Guideline-Based Discharge Therapy Use Data are presented as percentages except as indicated. ACE = angiotensin converting enzyme.

  8. RESULTS:Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes Data are presented as percentages except as indicated. OR = odds ratio; MI = myocardial infarction; RBC = red blood cell; LOS = length of stay. *In patients not receiving coronary artery bypass graft surgery. †Major Bleeding is as defined as: 1) absolute hematocrit (HCT) drop of ≥12% (baseline HCT - nadir HCT ≥12%); 2) intracranial hemorrhage stroke; 3) retroperitoneal witnessed bleeding event; 4) baseline HCT ≥28% and RBC transfusion; 5) baseline HCT <28% and RBC transfusion and witnessed bleeding event. ‡Log transformation of adjusted LOS reported.

  9. CONCLUSION • We found that adjusted in-hospital outcomes for patients at for-profit hospitals were identical to non-profit hospitals. • Despite organizational differences that may exist in fiscal strategy and resource allocations, no differences were found in process measures, in-hospital outcomes, or procedure utilization.

More Related