The changing role of ancillary health care service providers: an evaluation of Health Diagnostic Laboratory, Inc.

In an effort to reduce cost and improve quality, health care payers have enacted a number of incentives to motivate providers to focus their efforts on achieving better clinical outcomes and reducing the prevalence and progression of disease. In response to these incentives, providers are entering into new arrangements such as accountable care organizations and patient-centered medical homes to redesign delivery processes and achieve quality and cost objectives. This article reports the results of a study designed to evaluate the impact on cost and quality of care resulting from services provided by Health Diagnostic Laboratory, Inc., a clinical laboratory with a comprehensive care model. The results show that patients who utilized these laboratory services experienced lower total cost of care (23% reduction, P<0.01) and improved lipid profiles during the follow-up period. Total cost reductions were related to cost reductions found in both inpatient and ambulatory care. These findings suggest that accountable care organizations, patient-centered medical homes, and other groups entering shared savings initiatives should consider the potential role ancillary service providers with comprehensive care models can play in the delivery of integrated care.

Association between high-normal levels of alanine aminotransferase and risk factors for atherogenesis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver disease has been associated with cardiovascular disorders, but little is known about the relationship between serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and markers of atherogenesis. We investigated the relationship between low-normal and high-normal levels of ALT and an extended panel of cardiovascular risk factors among individuals with no known diseases in a primary care setting. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data collected from 6442 asymptomatic patients at wellness visits to a primary care setting in central Virginia from 2010 through 2011. Serum levels of ALT were compared with levels of lipids and lipoproteins, as well as metabolic, inflammatory, and coagulation-related factors associated with risk for cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: Serum levels of ALT were higher than 40 IU/L in 12% of subjects, and in the high-normal range (19-40 IU/L in women and 31-40 IU/L in men) in 25% of subjects. ALT level was associated with the apolipoprotein B level, concentration and particle size of very-low-density lipoproteins, concentration of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles (LDL-P), and percentages of small dense LDL (sdLDL) and sdLDL-cholesterol (sdLDL-C) (P < .0001 for all). A high-normal level of ALT was associated with higher levels of LDL-C, LDL-P, sdLDL-C, and sdLDL particles (P < .001 for all). These effects were independent of age, body mass index, and hyperinsulinemia. Increasing levels of ALT and fasting hyperinsulinemia (>12 µU/mL) synergized with increasing levels of triglycerides, very-low-density lipoprotein particles, LDL-P, sdLDL-C, and percentage of sdLDL-C. Levels of APOA1, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein-class 2 were associated inversely with serum level of ALT (P < .0001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of asymptomatic individuals, increased serum levels of ALT (even high-normal levels) are associated with markers of cardiovascular disease.

Comparison of push-in versus pull-out tests on bone-implant interfaces of rabbit tibia dental implant healing model.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate whether push-in and pull-out tests measure mechanical properties of the bone-implant interface differently, and which test is more sensitive to changes over the healing period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two identical self-threading dental implants (3.3×8.5mm) were placed in medial surface of the proximal condyles of left and right tibias of 20 rabbits (40 implants total). Five rabbits each were sacrificed after 1, 4, 8, and 12 weeks of healing. Push-in test was performed on one side's tibia implant and pull-out on the other side's implant, at a rate of 6mm/min. Primary and secondary implant stabilities and tibia weight were measured on all implants. RESULTS: The push-in test generated significantly higher failure load (p=.0001; 530N vs 279N), lower displacement at failure (p=.0003; 0.436mm vs 0.680mm), and higher interface stiffness (p<.0001; 1,641N/mm vs 619N/mm) than pull-out test. Failure load, stiffness, and secondary implant stability were significantly higher for longer compared with shorter healing periods, while displacement, tibia weight, and primary stability were not. Failure load and stiffness differed significantly for four healing times for the push-in but not for the pull-out test. Failure load was significantly correlated with secondary implant stability for both push-in (r=0.66) and pull-out (r=0.48) tests, but stiffness was significantly correlated with secondary stability only for the push-in test (r=0.72; pull-out test r=0.40). CONCLUSION: The push-in test appeared more sensitive than pull-out to changes in mechanical properties at bone-implant interfaces during healing in rabbit tibia model.