A Multistate Comparison of Patient Characteristics, Outcomes, and Treatment Practices in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Appending limited clinical data to an administrative database for assessing institutional quality outliers for AMI care: Does it matter?

“…For example, in a multistate comparison of patient characteristics, outcomes, and treatment practices in AMI, Saleh et al found an in-hospital mortality rate of 10.4% across eleven states and 11.4% in New York using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data [19]. The rate in our study is likely somewhat lower than in the Saleh study because there is a larger concentration of hospitals that perform percutaneous coronary intervention in our study (14 out of 22).…”

Results of Emergency Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Importance of Intraoperative and Postoperative Cardiac Medical Therapy

“…The early mortality rate of CABG for AMI is reported to be between 8.2% and 42.6%. [2][3][4][5][6][7] In addition, many patients show delayed cardiac events and cardiac death. In the SHOCK trial for AMI patients with cardiogenic shock, White et al reported that patients treated with CABG had a greater prevalence of diabetes and more severe coronary disease than did those treated with PCI.…”

The choice between different statistical approaches to risk-adjustment influenced the identification of outliers

“…Following an effect (or deviation) coding, k À 1 dummy variables for k hospitals were introduced: the value of each dummy was equal to 1 if the case was from the hospital corresponding to that variable, À1 if the case was from the kth hospital not corresponding to any of the dummy variables, and 0 otherwise [1,4]. The performance of the kth provider can be obtained either by the sum of the negative coefficients of the dummy variables [1] or, because results do not depend on the choice of the kth hospital, by rerunning the model with a different provider not corresponding to any dummy [8].…”