An evidence-based assessment of federal guidelines for overweight and obesity as they apply to elderly persons.

BACKGROUND: The US Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults set the body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) of 25 as the upper limit of ideal weight for all adults regardless of age. However, the prognostic importance of overweight and obesity in elderly persons (>/=65 years) is controversial. We sought to analyze the guidelines in the context of currently available evidence that is relevant to older adults. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for all English-language studies of the association between BMI and all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or coronary heart disease events from January 1966 through October 1999. Additional pertinent articles were identified through bibliographies of the MEDLINE articles. We selected studies for detailed review if they reported on the association between BMI and mortality for nonhospitalized subjects who were 65 years or older and had been followed up for at least 3 years. We controlled for age, smoking, and baseline health status. Of the 444 screened articles, 13 were selected to assess the guidelines. We extracted information regarding publication year, study design, population, recruitment period, follow-up duration, number of subjects, sex, age range, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and statistical models, including variables and end points. RESULTS: These data do not support the BMI range of 25 to 27 as a risk factor for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among elderly persons. The results were not substantially different for men and women. Most studies showed a negative or no association between BMI and all-cause mortality. Three studies indicated overweight (BMI >/=27) as a significant prognostic factor for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among 65- to 74-year-olds, and one study showed a significant positive association between overweight (BMI >/=28) and all-cause mortality among those 75 years or older. Higher BMI values were consistent with a smaller relative mortality risk in elderly persons compared with young and middle-aged populations. CONCLUSIONS: Federal guideline standards for ideal weight (BMI 18.7 to <25) may be overly restrictive as they apply to the elderly. Studies do not support overweight, as opposed to obesity, as conferring an excess mortality risk. Future guidelines should consider the evidence for specific age groups when establishing standards for healthy weight.

National use and effectiveness of beta-blockers for the treatment of elderly patients after acute myocardial infarction: National Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

CONTEXT: Despite the importance of beta-blockers for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), several studies have suggested that they are substantially underutilized, particularly in older patients. OBJECTIVES: To describe the contemporary national pattern of beta-blocker prescription at hospital discharge among patients aged 65 years or older with an AMI, to identify the most important predictors of the prescribed use of beta-blockers at discharge, and to determine the independent association between beta-blockers at discharge and mortality in clinical practice. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using data created from medical charts and administrative files. SETTING: Acute care nongovernmental hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: National cohort of 115015 eligible patients aged 65 years or older who survived hospitalization with a confirmed AMI in 1994 or 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Blocker as a discharge medication and mortality in the year after discharge. RESULTS: Among the 45308 patients without contraindications to beta-blockers, 22665 (50.0%) had a beta-blocker as a discharge medication. There was significant variation by state, ranging from 30.3% to 77.1 %. Of the 36795 patients who were not receiving beta-blocker therapy on admission, 16006 (43.5%) had therapy initiated on or before discharge. Demographic and clinical variables explained relatively little of the variation in the initiation of beta-blocker therapy. The prescribed use of calcium channel blockers at discharge had a strong negative association with the use of beta-blockers (odds ratio [OR] of beta-blocker use, 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.26). The New England region had significantly higher use of beta-blocker therapy than the rest of the country. Compared with cardiologists, internists had similar rates (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-1.00) and general and family practice physicians had lower rates (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.83). After adjusting for potential confounders, beta-blockers were associated with a 14% lower risk of mortality at 1 year after discharge. The association with lower mortality was present in subgroups stratified by age, sex, and left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSIONS: Many ideal patients for beta-blocker therapy are not prescribed these drugs at discharge following AMI. The clinical and demographic characteristics of the patients do not explain much of the variation in the treatment pattern. Geographic factors and physician specialty are independently associated with the decision to use beta-blockers. Elderly patients who are prescribed beta-blockers at discharge have a better survival rate, consistent with the findings of randomized controlled trials of younger and lower-risk populations.

Trends in costs of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate recent trends in the cost of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), particularly the impact of newer technology and changing patient profile. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study with a 6-month follow up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared the data on two groups of 100 consecutive patients admitted for elective PTCA at Yale-New Haven Hospital in 1995 and 1996. Hospital records, cineangiograms, and hospital cost accounting system were reviewed, and 6-month clinical outcomes were obtained from telephone interviews and medical chart review. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical characteristics did not differ between the 1995 and 1996 groups of patients, nor was a difference detected in in-hospital and 6-month clinical outcomes between 1995 and 1996. Angiographic features of treated lesions were different between the two groups, with a significantly higher frequency of type C and totally occluded lesions in 1996 (p = 0.002 and p = 0.04, respectively). The total hospital costs were higher in 1996 compared with 1995 ($11,799 +/- $6189 vs $10,087 +/- $5608; p = 0.04). This difference persisted after adjustment for changes in patient population. The major factor responsible for escalating costs was a 45% increase in catheterization laboratory costs ($8575 +/- $4524 in 1996 vs $5916 +/- $3030 in 1995; P < 0.0001). In contrast, the noncatheterization costs decreased substantially during this period, largely as a result of an approximately 33% decrease in length of stay (3.75 +/- 2.66 days in 1995 vs 2.57 +/- 1.99 days in 1996; P = 0.0005). In a multiple linear regression model, the most important determinants of cost were lesion characteristics, stent use, and radiographic contrast volume. CONCLUSIONS: Despite cost reduction efforts, the costs of PTCA are rising because of increased consumption of resources in the catheterization laboratory.