Problems in health data analysis: The Maryland permanent pacemaker experience in 1979 and 1980

Scherlis, Leonard; Dembo, Donald H.

doi:10.1016/s0002-9149(83)80023-x

Cited by 19 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1982, the Senate Special Committee on Aging published a volume entitled, “Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in the Medicare Pacemaker Industry.” In the same year, Greenberg and colleagues 87 reported that 23% of pacemakers implanted in Maryland in 1979 and 1980 were not justifiable, and an additional 13% were questionable 87 . Although Greenberg's results were harshly criticized, 88 , 89 a later article found that in Philadelphia County in 1983, 20% of pacemaker implantations were classified as “not indicated” and 35% as “possibly indicated.“ 90 These reports may have contributed to a dramatic fall in pacemaker utilization 91 . The rate per million population had increased from 309 in 1978 to 518 in 1981.…”

Section: Regulatory and Economic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Permanent Cardiac Pacemakers in the Elderly

Bush

Finucane²

1994

J American Geriatrics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Regulatory and Economic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Permanent Cardiac Pacemakers in the Elderly

Bush

Finucane²

1994

J American Geriatrics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The survival figures are illustrated in Figure 6 which also shows the data from FlorVol, f. No. 4,1983 Clin. Prog, in Pacing and Electrophysiol.…”

Section: Survival In Chronic Sinus Node Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%

Natural History of Sinoatrial Disorders

Shaw

Hocknell

1990

Cardiovasc electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cardiology and the Quality of Medical Practice

Winters¹

1991

JAMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Response THE ARTICLE prepared for this issue of JAMA by the Cardiology Working Group1 is more evidence from concerned citizens (medical and nonmedical) of the need to explore the issues of and search for solutions to the escalation of health care costs that threaten the solvency of our health care system. The Cardiology Working Group is composed of distinguished individuals from the fields of medicine, law, business, and economics. It is my understanding that this article is a distillation of discussions held by this group over a period of many months. Their concern for the appropriate utilization of "proved effective and beneficial" resources in our medical care system is succinctly articulated. I believe what they are searching for is "value" in health care. Value is a personal measure of benefit, as well as a measure of cost. Value in health is subjective and, in many instances, undefined or unknown. Value varies from one person to another, one age to another, one segment of our society to another, one region to another, and even one country to another. Value relates to outcomes of our diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium.And outcomes, if understood at all, are not well delineated across the multiple diagnostic and therapeutic options avail¬ able to patients and physicians. Recognition that outcomes are an expression of value, as well as a matter of cost, helps to explain the recent interest in "outcome research" by the federal government, third-party payers, and the medical community.From the

show abstract

Problems in health data analysis: The Maryland permanent pacemaker experience in 1979 and 1980

Cited by 19 publications

References 9 publications

Permanent Cardiac Pacemakers in the Elderly

Permanent Cardiac Pacemakers in the Elderly

Natural History of Sinoatrial Disorders

Cardiology and the Quality of Medical Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About