12 research outputs found

    Declining mortality following acute myocardial infarction in the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Care System

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Mortality from acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is declining worldwide. We sought to determine if mortality in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has also been declining.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We calculated 30-day mortality rates between 2004 and 2006 using data from the VHA External Peer Review Program (EPRP), which entails detailed abstraction of records of all patients with AMI. To compare trends within VHA with other systems of care, we estimated relative mortality rates between 2000 and 2005 for all males 65 years and older with a primary diagnosis of AMI using administrative data from the VHA Patient Treatment File and the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) files.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Using EPRP data on 11,609 patients, we observed a statistically significant decline in adjusted 30-day mortality following AMI in VHA from 16.3% in 2004 to 13.9% in 2006, a relative decrease of 15% and a decrease in the odds of dying of 10% per year (p = .011). Similar declines were found for in-hospital and 90-day mortality.</p> <p>Based on administrative data on 27,494 VHA patients age 65 years and older and 789,400 Medicare patients, 30-day mortality following AMI declined from 16.0% during 2000-2001 to 15.7% during 2004-June 2005 in VHA and from 16.7% to 15.5% in private sector hospitals. After adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital effects, the overall relative odds of death were similar for VHA and Medicare (odds ratio 1.02, 95% C.I. 0.96-1.08).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Mortality following AMI within VHA has declined significantly since 2003 at a rate that parallels that in Medicare-funded hospitals.</p

    Transforming self-rated health and the SF-36 scales to include death and improve interpretability

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Most measures of health-related quality of life are undefined for people who die. Longitudinal analyses are often limited to a healthier cohort (survivors) that cannot be identified prospectively, and that may have had little change in health. OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate methods to transform a single self-rated health item (excellent to poor; EVGGFP) and the physical component score of the SF-36 (PCS) to new variables that include a defensible value for death. METHODS: Using longitudinal data from two large studies of older adults, health variables were transformed to the probability of being healthy in the future, conditional on the current observed value; death then has the value of 0. For EVGGFP, the new transformations were compared with some that were published earlier, based on different data. For the PCS, how well three different transformations, based on different definitions of being healthy, discriminated among groups of patients, and detected change in time were assessed. RESULTS: The new transformation for EVGGFP was similar to that published previously. Coding the 5 categories as 95, 90, 80, 30, and 15, and coding dead as 0 is recommended. The three transformations of the PCS detected group differences and change at least as well as the standard PCS. CONCLUSION: These easily interpretable transformed variables permit keeping persons who die in the analyses. Using the transformed variables for longitudinal analyses of health when deaths occur, either for secondary or primary analysis, is recommended. This approach can be applied to other measures of health

    Inhaled Corticosteroids and Risk of Lung Cancer among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

    No full text
    Rationale and Objectives: Lung cancer is a frequent cause of death among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We examined whether the use of inhaled corticosteroids among patients with COPD was associated with a decreased risk of lung cancer

    Alcohol-related Discussions during General Medicine Appointments of Male VA Patients Who Screen Positive for At-risk Drinking

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: This study describes primary care discussions with patients who screened positive for at-risk drinking. In addition, discussions about alcohol use from 2 clinic firms, one with a provider-prompting intervention, are compared. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analyses of audiotaped appointments collected over 6 months. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Male patients in a VA general medicine clinic were eligible if they screened positive for at-risk drinking and had a general medicine appointment with a consenting provider during the study period. Participating patients (N = 47) and providers (N = 17) were enrolled in 1 of 2 firms in the clinic (Intervention or Control) and were blinded to the study focus. INTERVENTION: Intervention providers received patient-specific results of positive alcohol-screening tests at each visit. MEASURES AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 68 visits taped, 39 (57.4%) included any mention of alcohol. Patient and provider utterances during discussions about alcohol use were coded using Motivational Interviewing Skills Codes. Providers contributed 58% of utterances during alcohol-related discussions with most coded as questions (24%), information giving (23%), or facilitation (34%). Advice, reflective listening, and supportive or affirming statements occurred infrequently (5%, 3%, and 5%, of provider utterances respectively). Providers offered alcohol-related advice during 21% of visits. Sixteen percent of patient utterances reflected “resistance” to change and 12% reflected readiness to change. On average, Intervention providers were more likely to discuss alcohol use than Control providers (82.4% vs 39.6% of visits; P = .026). CONCLUSIONS: During discussions about alcohol, general medicine providers asked questions and offered information, but usually did not give explicit alcohol-related advice. Discussions about alcohol occurred more often when providers were prompted

    Effects of sustained audit/feedback on self-reported health status of primary care patients

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Because limited audit/feedback of health status information has yielded mixed results, we evaluated the effects of a sustained program of audit/feedback on patient health and satisfaction. METHODS: We conducted a group-randomized effectiveness trial in which firms within Veterans Administration general internal medicine clinics served as units of randomization, intervention, and analysis. Respondents to a baseline health inventory were regularly mailed the 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) and, as relevant, questionnaires about six chronic conditions (ischemic heart disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, alcohol use, and hypertension) and satisfaction with care. Data were reported to primary providers at individual patient visits and in aggregate during a 2-year period. RESULTS: Baseline forms were mailed to 34,050 patients; of the 22,413 respondents, 15,346 completed and returned follow-up surveys. Over the 2-year study, the difference between intervention and control groups (as measured by difference in average slope) was -0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.79 to 0.27; P=0.28) for the SF-36 Physical Component Summary score and -0.53 (95% CI: -1.09 to 0.03; P=0.06) for the SF-36 Mental Component Summary score. No significant differences emerged after adjusting for deaths. There were no significant differences in condition-specific measures or satisfaction between groups after adjustment for provider type, panel size, and number of intervention visits, or after analysis of patients who completed all forms. CONCLUSION: An elaborate, sustained audit/feedback program of general and condition-specific measures of health/satisfaction did not improve outcomes. To be effective, such data probably should be incorporated into a comprehensive chronic disease management program

    Screening for Problem Drinking: Comparison of CAGE and AUDIT

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To compare self-administered versions of three questionnaires for detecting heavy and problem drinking: the CAGE, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and an augmented version of the CAGE. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys. SETTING: Three Department of Veterans Affairs general medical clinics. PATIENTS: Random sample of consenting male outpatients who consumed at least 5 drinks over the past year (“drinkers”). Heavy drinkers were oversampled. MEASUREMENTS: An augmented version of the CAGE was included in a questionnaire mailed to all patients. The AUDIT was subsequently mailed to “drinkers.” Comparison standards, based on the tri-level World Health Organization alcohol consumption interview and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, included heavy drinking (>14 drinks per week typically or ≥5 drinks per day at least monthly) and active DSM-IIIR alcohol abuse or dependence (positive diagnosis and at least one alcohol-related symptom in the past year). Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were used to compare screening questionnaires. MAIN RESULTS: Of 393 eligible patients, 261 (66%) returned the AUDIT and completed interviews. For detection of active alcohol abuse or dependence, the CAGE augmented with three more questions (AUROC 0.871) performed better than either the CAGE alone or AUDIT (AUROCs 0.820 and 0.777, respectively). For identification of heavy-drinking patients, however, the AUDIT performed best (AUROC 0.870). To identify both heavy drinking and active alcohol abuse or dependence, the augmented CAGE and AUDIT both performed well, but the AUDIT was superior (AUROC 0.861). CONCLUSIONS: For identification of patients with heavy drinking or active alcohol abuse or dependence, the self-administered AUDIT was superior to the CAGE in this population
    corecore