New York Risk Model and Simplified Risk Score for In-Hospital/30-Day Mortality for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Risk models and risk scores derived from those models require periodic updating to account for changes in procedural performance, patient mix, and new risk factors added to existing systems. No risk model or risk score exists for predicting in-hospital/30-day mortality for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) using contemporary data. This study develops an updated risk model and simplified risk score for in-hospital/30-day mortality following PCI. To accomplish this, New York's Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reporting System was used to develop a logistic regression model and a simplified risk score model for predicting in-hospital/30-day mortality and to validate both models based on New York data from the previous year. A total of 54,770 PCI patients from 2019 were used to develop the models. Twelve different risk factors and 27 risk factor categories were used in the models. Both models displayed excellent discrimination for the development and validation samples (range from 0.894 to 0.896) and acceptable calibration, but the full logistic model had superior calibration, particularly among higher-risk patients. In conclusion, both the PCI risk model and its simplified risk score model provide excellent discrimination and although the full risk model requires the use of a hand-held device for estimating individual patient risk, it provides somewhat better calibration, especially among higher-risk patients.

Ad Hoc Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Stable Patients With Multivessel or Unprotected Left Main Disease.

BACKGROUND: There is very little information about the use of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable patients with multivessel (MV) disease or unprotected left main (LM) disease patients for whom a heart team approach is recommended. OBJECTIVE: To identify the extent of ad hoc PCI utilization for patients with multivessel disease or left main disease, and to explore the inter-hospital variation in ad hoc PCI utilization for those patients. METHODS: New York State's cardiac registries were used to examine the use and variation in use of ad hoc PCI for MV/LM disease as a percentage of all MV/LM PCIs and revascularizations (PCIs plus coronary artery bypass graft procedures) during 2018 to 2019 in New York. RESULTS: After exclusions, 6,425 of the 8,196 stable PCI patients with MV/LM disease (78.4%) underwent ad hoc PCI, ranging from 58.7% for patients with unprotected LM disease to 85.4% for patients with 2-vessel proximal left anterior descending (PLAD) disease. Ad hoc PCIs comprised 35.1% of all revascularizations, ranging from 11.5% for patients with unprotected LM disease to 63.9% for patients with 2-vessel PLAD disease. The risk-adjusted utilization of ad hoc PCI as a percentage of all revascularizations varied widely among hospitals (eg, from 15% in the first quartile to 46% in the last quartile for 3-vessel disease). CONCLUSIONS: Ad hoc PCIs occur frequently even among patients with MV/LM disease. This is particularly true among patients with 2-vessel PLAD disease. The frequency of ad hoc PCIs is lower but still high among patients with diabetes and low ejection fraction and higher in hospitals without surgery on-site (SOS). Given the magnitude of hospital- and physician-level variation in the use of ad hoc PCIs for such patients, consideration should be given to a systems approach to achieving heart team consultation and shared decision making that is consistent for SOS and non-SOS hospitals.

Impact of COVID-19 on percutaneous coronary intervention utilization and mortality in New York.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has disrupted the care of all patients, and little is known about its impact on the utilization and short-term mortality of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients, particularly nonemergency patients. METHODS: New York State's PCI registry was used to study the utilization of PCI and the presence of COVID-19 in four patient subgroups ranging in severity from ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to elective patients before (December 01, 2018-February 29, 2020) and during the COVID-19 era (March 01, 2020-May 31, 2021), as well as to examine the impact of different COVID severity levels on the mortality of different types of PCI patients. RESULTS: Decreases in the mean quarterly PCI volume from the prepandemic period to the first quarter of the pandemic ranged from 20% for STEMI patients to 61% for elective patients, with the other two subgroups having decreases in between these values. PCI quarterly volume rebounds from the prepandemic period to the second quarter of 2021 were in excess of 90% for all patient subgroups, and 99.7% for elective patients. Existing COVID-19 was rare among PCI patients, ranging from 1.74% for STEMI patients to 3.66% for elective patients. PCI patients with COVID-19 and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who were not intubated, and PCI patients with COVID-19 and ARDS who were either intubated or were not intubated because of Do Not Resuscitate//Do Not Intubate status had higher risk-adjusted mortality ([adjusted ORs = 10.81 [4.39, 26.63] and 24.53 [12.06, 49.88], respectively]) than patients who never had COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There were large decreases in the utilization of PCI during COVID-19, with the percentage of decrease being highly sensitive to patient acuity. By the second quarter of 2021, prepandemic volumes were nearly restored for all patient subgroups. Very few PCI patients had current COVID-19 throughout the pandemic period, but the number of PCI patients with a COVID-19 history increased steadily during the pandemic. PCI patients with COVID-19 accompanied by ARDS were at much higher risk of short-term mortality than patients who never had COVID-19. COVID-19 without ARDS and history of COVID-19 were not associated with higher mortality for PCI patients as of the second quarter of 2021.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With and Without Intravascular Ultrasound for Patients With Complex Lesions: Utilization, Mortality, and Target Vessel Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has several benefits during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), including more accurate vessel sizing, improved stent expansion, and better strut apposition. Prior clinical trials have demonstrated a reduction in cardiac events when IVUS is used. However, there is limited information about the utilization of IVUS and the outcomes of IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided PCI in patients with complex lesions in a contemporary population-based setting. METHODS: New York's PCI registry was used to identify 44 305 patients with complex lesions (lesions that complicate stenting or that require multiple stents) undergoing PCI with and without IVUS guidance and discharged between December 1, 2013 and November 30, 2018. Trends and inter-hospital variation in IVUS use were examined. Risk-adjusted mortality and target vessel revascularization were compared. RESULTS: A total of 6174 (13.9%) PCI patients underwent IVUS-guided PCI. The median follow-up period was 2.5 years. The percent of patients with complex lesions who underwent IVUS-guided PCI rose from 13.4% in 2014 to 16.5% in 2018 (P<0.0001 for trend), with the main increases occurring in the last 2 years of the period. Only 31 of 66 hospitals in the study used IVUS for >5% of their study patients. IVUS-guided PCI patients experienced significantly lower mortality (adjusted hazard ratio=0.89 [0.79-0.98] after adjustment using a Cox proportional hazards model, and HR=0.88 [0.78-0.99] for propensity-matched patients). We also found that IVUS-guided PCI patients had a lower rate of target vessel revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio=0.88 [0.80-0.97]) after adjusting using Cox proportional hazards with competing risk of mortality and after propensity matching (0.88 [0.79-0.99]). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of IVUS for complex lesions has increased but contemporary rates remain low, and there are large inter-hospital variations. The use of IVUS for complex lesions was associated with lower risk of medium-term mortality and target vessel revascularization.

Relation of Operator Volume and Access Site to Short-Term Mortality in Radial Versus Femoral Access for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

The relation between operator volume and mortality of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) procedures for ST-elevation myocardial infarction has not been studied comprehensively. This study included patients who underwent PPCI between 2010 and 2017 in all nonfederal hospitals approved to perform PCI in New York State. We compared risk-adjusted in-hospital/30-day mortality for radial access (RA) and femoral access (FA) and the relation between risk-adjusted mortality and procedure volume for each access site. In 44,540 patients in the study period, the use of RA rose from 8% in 2,010% to 43% in 2017 (p <0.0001). There was no significant change in PPCI risk-adjusted mortality during the period (p=0.27 for trend). RA was associated with lower mortality when imposing operator exclusion criteria used in recent trials. There was a significant operator inverse volume-mortality relation for FA procedures but not for RA procedures. FA procedures performed by lower volume FA operators (lowest quartile) were associated with higher risk-adjusted mortality compared with RA procedures (3.71% vs 3.06%, p = 0.01) or compared with FA procedures performed by higher volume FA operators (3.71% vs 3.16%, p = 0.01). In conclusion, in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction referred for primary PCI in New York State, there was a significant uptake in the use of RA along with relatively constant in-hospital/30-day mortality. There was a significant inverse operator volume-mortality relation for FA procedures accompanied by higher mortality for FA procedures performed by low volume FA operators than for all other primary PCI procedures. In conclusion, this information underscores the need for operators to remain vigilant in maintaining FA skills and monitoring FA outcomes.

The Association of Socioeconomic Factors With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have identified the association of socioeconomic factors with outcomes of cardiac surgical procedures. Most have focused on easily measured demographic factors or on socioeconomic characteristics of patients' 5-digit zip codes. The impact of socioeconomic information that is derived from smaller geographic regions has rarely been studied. METHODS: The association of the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) with short-term mortality and readmissions was tested for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in New York while adjusting for numerous patient risk factors, including race, ethnicity, and payer. Changes in hospitals' risk-adjusted outcomes and outlier status with the addition of socioeconomic factors were examined. RESULTS: After adjustment, patients in the 2 most deprived ADI quintiles were more likely to experience in-hospital and 30-day mortality after PCI (adjusted odds ratios [95% confidence intervals] 1.39 [1.18-1.65] and 1.24 [1.03-1.49], respectively), than patients in the first quintile (least deprived). Also, patients in the second and fifth ADI quintiles had higher 30-day readmissions rates than patients in the first quintile (1.12 [1.01-1.25] and 1.17 [1.04-1.32], respectively). Medicare patients had higher mortality and readmission rates, Hispanics had lower mortality, and Medicaid patients had higher readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with the most deprived ADIs are more likely to experience short-term mortality and readmissions after PCI. Ethnicity and payer are significantly associated with adverse outcomes even after adjusting for ADI. This information should be considered when identifying patients who are at the highest risk for adverse events after PCI and when risk-adjusting hospital outcomes and assessing quality of care.

Hybrid coronary revascularization vs. percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines a minimally invasive surgical approach to the left anterior descending (LAD) artery with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD diseased coronary arteries. It is associated with shorter hospital lengths of stay and recovery times than conventional coronary artery bypass surgery, but there is little information comparing it to isolated PCI for multivessel disease. Our objective is to compare long-term outcomes of HCR and PCI for patients with multivessel disease. METHODS: This cohort study used data from New York's cardiac surgery and PCI registries in 2010-2016 to examine mortality and repeat revascularization rates for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who underwent HCR and PCI. Cox proportional hazards methods were used to reduce selection bias. Patients were followed for a median of four years. RESULTS: There was a total of 335 HCR patients (1.2%) and 25,557 PCI patients (98.8%) after exclusions. There was no difference in 6-year risk adjusted survival between HCR and PCI patients (83.17% vs. 81.65%, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.90 (95% CI: 0.67-1.20). However, HCR patients were more likely to be free from repeat revascularization in the LAD artery (91.13% vs. 83.59%, aHR = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.34-0.77)). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease, HCR is rarely performed. There are no differences in mortality rates after four years, but HCR is associated with lower repeat revascularization rates in the LAD artery, presumably due to better longevity in left arterial mammary grafts.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Before and During COVID in New York.

Little is known about regional differences in volume, treatment, and outcomes of STEMI patients undergoing PCI during the pandemic. The objectives of this study were to compare COVID-19 pandemic and prepandemic periods with respect to regional volumes, outcomes, and treatment of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) between January 1, 2019 and March 14, 2020 (pre-COVID period) and between March 15, 2020 and April 4, 2020 (COVID period) in 51 New York State hospitals certified to perform PCI. The hospitals were classified as being in either high-density or low-density COVID-19 counties on the basis of deaths/10,000 population. There was a decrease of 43% in procedures/week in high-density COVID-19 counties (p <0.0001) and only 4% in low-density counties (p = 0.64). There was no difference in the change in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates in either type of county, but STEMI PCI patients in high-density counties had longer times from symptom onset to hospital arrival and lower cardiac arrest rates in the pandemic period. In conclusion, the decrease in STEMI PCIs during the pandemic was mainly limited to counties with a high density of COVID-19 deaths. The decrease appears to be primarily related to patients not presenting to hospitals in high-density COVID regions, rather than PCI being avoided in STEMI patients or a reduction in the incidence of STEMI. Also, high-density COVID-19 counties experienced delayed admissions and less severely ill STEMI PCI patients during the pandemic. This information can serve to focus efforts on convincing STEMI patients to seek life-saving hospital care during the pandemic.

Sex differences in the treatment and outcomes of patients hospitalized with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: To compare mortality for women and men hospitalized with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) by age and revascularization status. BACKGROUND: There is little information on the mortality of men and women not undergoing revascularization, and the impact of age on relative male-female mortality needs to be revisited. METHODS AND RESULTS: An observational database of 23,809 patients with STEMI presenting at nonfederal New York State hospitals between 2013 and 2015 was used to compare risk-adjusted inhospital/30-day mortality for women and men and to explore the impact of age on those differences. Women had significantly higher mortality than men overall (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.15, 95% CI [1.04, 1.28]), and among patients aged 65 and older. Women had lower revascularization rates in general (AOR = 0.64 [0.59, 0.69]) and for all age groups. Among revascularized STEMI patients, women overall (AOR = 1.30 [1.10, 1.53]) and over 65 had higher mortality than men. Among patients not revascularized, women between the ages of 45 and 64 had lower mortality (AOR = 0.68 [0.48, 0.97]). CONCLUSIONS: Women with STEMI, and especially older women, had higher inhospital/30-day mortality rates than their male counterparts. Women had higher mortality among revascularized patients, but not among patients who were not revascularized.

Assessment of repeat target lesion percutaneous coronary intervention as a quality measure for public reporting and general quality assessment for PCIs.

BACKGROUND: Target lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (TLPCI) within 1 year of PCI has been proposed by critics of public reporting of short-term mortality as an alternative measure for PCI reporting. METHODS: New York's PCI registry was used to identify 1-year repeat TLPCI and 1-year repeat TLPCI/mortality for patients discharged between December 1, 2013 and November 30, 2014. Significant independent predictors of the outcomes were identified. Hospital and cardiologist risk-adjusted outcomes were calculated, and outlier status and correlations of risk-adjusted rates were examined for the three outcomes. RESULTS: The adverse outcome rates were 1.30, 4.21, and 8.97% for in-hospital/30-day mortality, 1-year repeat TLPCI, and 1-year repeat TLPCI/mortality. There were many commonalities but also many differences in significant predictors of the outcomes. Hospital and cardiologist risk-adjusted 1-year repeat TLPCI rates and repeat TLPCI/mortality rates were poorly correlated with risk-adjusted in-hospital/30-day mortality rates (eg, Spearman R = -.16 [p = .23] and .27 [p = .04], respectively, for hospital 1-year repeat TLPCI vs. in-hospital/30-day mortality). Many more providers were found to have significantly higher and lower rates for repeat TLPCI than for short-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital and cardiologist quality assessments are very different for TLPCI and repeat TLPCI/mortality than they are for short-term mortality. Repeat TLPCI/mortality rates are highly correlated with repeat TLPCI rates, but outlier providers differ. More study of repeat TLPCI and all the patient, cardiologist, and hospital factors associated with it may be required before using it as a supplement to, or in lieu of, short-term mortality in public reporting of PCI outcomes.

Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Myocardial Infarction in Hospitals With and Without On-Site Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have revealed no outcome differences among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in hospitals with and without surgery on-site (SOS), but one earlier study found differences in target vessel PCI rates and in mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction who did not undergo PCI. It is important to examine outcome differences between SOS and non-SOS hospitals with more contemporary data. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 21 924 propensity-matched patients who were discharged between January 1, 2013, and November 30, 2015, who were in the New York PCI registry and other hospital databases were used to compare outcomes in hospitals with and without SOS for all patients and for patients with and without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing PCI. Also, 30-day mortality was compared for patients with STEMI regardless of whether they underwent PCI. For all patients with PCI and patients without STEMI, there were no significant differences in in-hospital/30-day mortality, 2-year mortality, or 2-year repeat target lesion PCI. For patients with STEMI, there were no significant mortality differences between patients in SOS and non-SOS hospitals. Patients with STEMI in SOS hospitals had significantly lower 2-year repeat target lesion PCI rates (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.68 [0.49-0.94]). There was no difference in the percentage of patients undergoing PCI in the 2 types of hospitals (75.7% versus 74.6%; P=0.21) or in 30-day mortality of all patients with STEMI (patients who did and did not undergo PCI, 10.86% versus 11.32%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.06 [0.88-1.29]). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term and long-term outcomes were not different in SOS and non-SOS hospitals except that 2-year repeat target lesion PCI rates were lower in SOS hospitals for patients with STEMI.

2017 Versus 2012 Appropriate Use Criteria for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: Impact on Appropriateness Ratings.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to revisit cases rated as "inappropriate" in the 2012 appropriate use criteria (AUC) using the 2017 AUC. BACKGROUND: AUC for coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) were released in January 2017. Earlier 2012 AUC identified a relatively high percentage of New York State patients for whom percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was rated as "inappropriate" versus optimal medical therapy alone. METHODS: New York State's PCI registry was used to rate inappropriateness of patients undergoing PCI in 2014 using the 2012 and 2017 AUC, and to examine patient characteristics for patients rated differently. RESULTS: A total of 911 of 9,261 (9.8%) patients who underwent PCI in New York State in 2014 with SIHD without prior coronary artery bypass grafting were rated as "inappropriate" using the 2012 AUC, but only 171 (1.8%) patients were rated as "rarely appropriate" ("inappropriate" in 2012 AUC terminology) using the 2017 AUC. A total of 26% of all 8,407 patients undergoing PCI in New York State with 1- to 2-vessel SIHD were without high-risk findings on noninvasive testing and were either asymptomatic or without antianginal therapy. No current or past randomized controlled trials have focused on these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of 2014 New York State PCI patients with SIHD who are rated "rarely appropriate" has decreased substantially using 2017 AUC in comparison with the older 2012 AUC. However, for many low-risk patients undergoing the procedure, the relative benefits of optimal medical therapy with and without PCI are unknown. Randomized controlled trials are needed to study these groups.

Association of Coronary Vessel Characteristics With Outcome in Patients With Percutaneous Coronary Interventions With Incomplete Revascularization.

Importance: Many studies have compared outcomes for incomplete revascularization (IR) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), but little is known about whether outcomes are related to the nature of the IR. Objective: To determine whether some coronary vessel characteristics are associated with worse outcomes in patients with PCI with IR. Design, Setting, and Participants: New York's PCI registry was used to examine mortality (median follow-up, 3.4 years) as a function of the number of vessels that were incompletely revascularized, the stenosis in those vessels, and whether the proximal left anterior descending artery was incompletely revascularized after controlling for other factors associated with mortality for patients with and without ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This was a multicenter study (all nonfederal PCI hospitals in New York State) that included 41 639 New York residents with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing PCI in New York State between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012. Exposures: Percutaneous coronary interventions, with complete and incomplete revascularization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Medium-term mortality. Results: For patients with STEMI, the mean age was 62.8 years; 26.2% were women, 11.9% were Hispanic, and 81.5% were white. For other patients, the mean age was 66.6 years, 29.1% were women, 11.3% were Hispanic, and 79.1% were white. Incomplete revascularization was very common (78% among patients with STEMI and 71% among other patients). Patients with IR in a vessel with at least 90% stenosis were at higher risk than other patients with IR. This was not significant among patients with STEMI (17.18% vs 12.86%; adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.16; 95% CI, 0.99-1.37) and significant among patients without STEMI (17.71% vs 12.96%; AHR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.07-1.24). Similarly, patients with IR in 2 or more vessels had higher mortality than patients with completely revascularization and higher mortality than other patients with IR among patients with STEMI (20.37% vs 14.39%; AHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.15-1.59) and among patients without STEMI (20.10% vs 12.86%; AHR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09-1.59). Patients with proximal left anterior descending artery vessel IR had higher mortality than other patients with IR (20.09% vs 14.67%; AHR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.64 for patients with STEMI and 20.78% vs 15.62%; AHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23 for patients without STEMI). More than 20% of all PCI patients had IR of 2 or more vessels and more than 30% had IR with more than 90% stenosis. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with IR are at higher risk of mortality if they have IR with at least 90% stenosis, IR in 2 or more vessels, or proximal left anterior descending IR.

Incomplete revascularization for percutaneous coronary interventions: Variation among operators, and association with operator and hospital characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have compared outcomes for incomplete revascularization (IR) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), but little is known about the correlates of IR, the extent to which complete revascularization (CR) was attempted unsuccessfully, and the variation across operators in the use of IR. METHODS: New York's PCI registry was used to examine medium-term mortality for IR, the variables associated with the use of IR, and the variation across operators in the utilization of IR after controlling for patient factors. RESULTS: Incomplete revascularization occurred for 63% of all patients and was significantly associated with higher 3-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio1.35, 95% CI 1.23-1.48) than for CR. A total of 96% of all attempted CRs were successful. Operators with 15 or fewer years in practice (the lowest half) used IR significantly more (65% vs 61%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.37) than other operators, and operators with annual volumes of 171 or lower (the lowest 3 quartiles) used IR more than other operators (68% vs 60%, AOR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59). Also, hospitals with annual volumes of 645 and lower (the lowest 50% of hospitals) used IR more (67% vs 62%, AOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.07-1.99) than other hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous coronary intervention patients without myocardial infarction who undergo IR continue to have higher medium-term (3-year) risk-adjusted mortality rates. There is a large amount of variability among operators in the frequency with which IR occurs. Operators who have been in practice longer, and higher-volume operators and hospitals have lower rates of IR. Failed attempts at CR occur very infrequently.

The Impact of Excluding Shock Patients on Hospital and Physician Risk-Adjusted Mortality Rates for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: The Implications for Public Reporting.

OBJECTIVES: The authors examined the impact of including shock patients in public reporting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) risk-adjusted mortality. BACKGROUND: There is concern that an unintended consequence of statewide public reporting of medical outcomes is the avoidance of appropriate interventions for high-risk patients. METHODS: New York State's PCI registry was used to compare hospital and physician risk-adjusted mortality rates and outliers from New York's public report models with rates and outliers based on statistical models that include refractory shock patients and exclude both refractory shock and other shock patients. RESULTS: Correlations between the public report model and each of the other 2 models were above 0.92 for hospital risk-adjusted rates and were 0.99 for all physician risk-adjusted rates (p < 0.0001). There were 11 physicians with lower than expected mortality rates (low outliers) and 41 physicians with higher than expected mortality rates (high outliers) across the 3 time periods in the public report, compared with 10 low outliers and 40 high outliers if all shock patients had been excluded. There was considerable overlap among outliers identified by the 3 models. Findings were similar for hospital outliers. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted hospital and physician mortality rates are highly correlated regardless of whether shock patients are included in public reporting. The numbers of outliers are similar, and outlier changes are minimal, although 10% to 15% of cardiologists who were outliers in either exclusion rule were not outliers in the other one. This information can form a basis for subsequent discussions regarding the exclusion of high-risk patients from public reporting.