TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcomes after acute coronary syndrome admission to primary versus tertiary Veterans Affairs medical centers
T2 - The Veterans Affairs Access to Cardiology study
AU - Rumsfeld, John S.
AU - Magid, David J.
AU - Peterson, Eric D.
AU - Plomondon, Mary E.
AU - Petersen, Laura A.
AU - Grunwald, Gary K.
AU - Every, Nathan R.
AU - Sales, Anne E.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service, Washington DC, grant ACC 97-079. Dr Rumsfeld is supported by a VA Health Services Research Advanced Research Career Development Award (ARCD-98-341-2). Dr Petersen is an awardee in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Generalist Physician Faculty Scholar Program.
PY - 2006/1
Y1 - 2006/1
N2 - Background: There is a concern that patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to primary care hospitals (without on-site cardiac procedures) may be at risk for worse outcomes compared with patients admitted to tertiary care hospitals. In addition to mortality, one way to assess patient outcomes is via health status and rehospitalization rates. We compared the health status and rehospitalization of patients with ACS admitted to primary versus tertiary care Veterans Affairs hospitals. Methods: This was a cohort study of 2132 patients with ACS admitted to 21 Veterans Affairs hospitals (12 primary care and 9 tertiary care) from 1998 to 1999. Primary outcomes were 7-month health status as measured by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and rehospitalization. Hierarchical multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between admission to a primary (vs tertiary) care hospital and these outcomes. Discharge medications and 7-month cardiac procedure rates were also compared. Results: There were no significant differences in discharge medication rates between primary and tertiary hospital patients. Forty-two percent of the patients admitted to a primary care hospital was transferred to a tertiary care hospital during index admission. Primary hospital patients had significantly lower 7-month rates of cardiac catheterization (36% vs 51%, P < .001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (11% vs 20%, P < .001), but there were no differences in coronary artery bypass graft surgery rates. After risk adjustment, there were no significant differences in 7-month angina frequency (odds ratio [OR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.78-1.22), physical limitation (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23), quality of life (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.89-1.40), or rehospitalization (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.14) between the 2 groups. Conclusions: These results suggest that an integrated health care system can achieve similar intermediate-term health status and rehospitalization outcomes for patients with ACS irrespective of the site of admission despite the lower rates of cardiac procedures for the primary care hospital patients.
AB - Background: There is a concern that patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to primary care hospitals (without on-site cardiac procedures) may be at risk for worse outcomes compared with patients admitted to tertiary care hospitals. In addition to mortality, one way to assess patient outcomes is via health status and rehospitalization rates. We compared the health status and rehospitalization of patients with ACS admitted to primary versus tertiary care Veterans Affairs hospitals. Methods: This was a cohort study of 2132 patients with ACS admitted to 21 Veterans Affairs hospitals (12 primary care and 9 tertiary care) from 1998 to 1999. Primary outcomes were 7-month health status as measured by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and rehospitalization. Hierarchical multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between admission to a primary (vs tertiary) care hospital and these outcomes. Discharge medications and 7-month cardiac procedure rates were also compared. Results: There were no significant differences in discharge medication rates between primary and tertiary hospital patients. Forty-two percent of the patients admitted to a primary care hospital was transferred to a tertiary care hospital during index admission. Primary hospital patients had significantly lower 7-month rates of cardiac catheterization (36% vs 51%, P < .001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (11% vs 20%, P < .001), but there were no differences in coronary artery bypass graft surgery rates. After risk adjustment, there were no significant differences in 7-month angina frequency (odds ratio [OR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.78-1.22), physical limitation (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.23), quality of life (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.89-1.40), or rehospitalization (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.14) between the 2 groups. Conclusions: These results suggest that an integrated health care system can achieve similar intermediate-term health status and rehospitalization outcomes for patients with ACS irrespective of the site of admission despite the lower rates of cardiac procedures for the primary care hospital patients.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=29144435192&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=29144435192&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.03.012
DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.03.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 16368288
AN - SCOPUS:29144435192
SN - 0002-8703
VL - 151
SP - 32
EP - 38
JO - American Heart Journal
JF - American Heart Journal
IS - 1
ER -