Effectiveness of beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the use and effectiveness of beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma. BACKGROUND: Because patients with COPD and asthma have largely been excluded from clinical trials of beta-blocker therapy for AMI, the extent to which these patients would benefit from beta-blocker therapy after AMI is not well defined. METHODS: Using data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project, we examined the relationship between discharge use of beta-blockers and one-year mortality in patients with COPD or asthma who were not using beta-agonists, patients with COPD or asthma who were concurrently using beta-agonists and patients with evidence of severe disease (use of prednisone or previous hospitalization for COPD or asthma) compared with patients without COPD or asthma. RESULTS: Of 54,962 patients without contraindications to beta-blockers, patients with COPD or asthma (20%) were significantly less likely to be prescribed beta-blockers at discharge after AMI. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, we found that beta-blockers were associated with lower one-year mortality in patients with COPD or asthma who were not on beta-agonist therapy (relative risk [RR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73 to 1.00), similar to patients without COPD or asthma (RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.92). A survival benefit for beta-blockers was not found among patients concurrently using beta-agonists or with severe COPD or asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blocker therapy after AMI may be beneficial for COPD or asthma patients with mild disease. A survival benefit was not found for elderly AMI patients with more severe pulmonary disease.

Medicare physician payment for practice expense: is it refined? Part 1. Office visit reevaluations.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the Medicare physician fee schedule practice expense payments, focusing on the 2001 changes for office visits, and to estimate the impact of these changes. METHODS: We analyzed the source data posted on the Health Care Financing Administration Web site to quantitate the changes in the office visit payments, the impact on Medicare payments by specialty, and the details of the office visit direct cost input changes. RESULTS: The 2001 office visit changes result in a redistribution of $600 million per year in Medicare payments away from cognitive services. Specialties that depend on such services for major portions of their incomes are adversely affected. Family physicians lose about $65 million per year and internists about $74 million per year in Medicare income alone. CONCLUSIONS: This substantial physician income redistribution was made with little advance notice, raising questions about its lawfulness. The volume of data needed to understand the practice expense changes and the rapidity with which changes are implemented highlights the usefulness of the Internet in disseminating information about these activities that critically affect physician practice.

Effect of diabetes mellitus and insulin use on survival after acute myocardial infarction in the elderly (the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project).

Using data from a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), we evaluated the role of diabetes mellitus on 30-day and 1-year mortality. We classified subjects as nondiabetics, diabetics controlled with diet alone, diabetics receiving an oral hypoglycemic agent, and diabetics on insulin at time of admission. We compared baseline admission characteristics of subgroups using chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and evaluated the effect of each diabetic state using sequential logistic models. We identified 80,832 nondiabetic patients, 9,862 diet-controlled diabetic patients, 14,664 diabetics receiving an oral hypoglycemic agent, and 12,241 diabetic patients on insulin therapy. Although mean age was similar among the groups, prevalence of hypertension, prior AMI, prior congestive heart failure, and prior revascularization were higher among diabetic patients, particularly those taking insulin. Diabetic patients, particularly those taking insulin, were less likely to receive aspirin and beta blockers and to undergo coronary revascularization. Diabetic patients had higher 30-day and 1-year mortality than nondiabetic patients. After adjustment for demographics, clinical and hospital characteristics, and treatment strategies, insulin-treated diabetics had the highest risk of mortality, followed by diabetics receiving oral hypoglycemic agents, followed by diet-controlled diabetics. Thus, diabetes is highly prevalent among elderly patients with an AMI. Mortality rates for these patients, particularly insulin-using diabetics, are higher than among their nondiabetic counterparts. Preventive and therapeutic strategies must be developed to ensure improved short- and long-term outcomes for elderly patients with diabetes and AMI.

Influencing care in acute myocardial infarction: a randomized trial comparing 2 types of intervention.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate performance feedback delivered by on-site presentations compared to mailed feedback on improving acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care. We used a randomized trial including 18 hospitals nested within the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. Patients comprised AMI Medicare patients admitted before (n = 929, 1994 and 1995) and after intervention (n = 438, 1996). Control hospitals received written feedback by mail. The experimental intervention group received a presentation led by a cardiologist and a quality improvement specialist. We assessed the proportion of patients receiving appropriate AMI care before and after the intervention. Both univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated no effect of the intervention in increasing the proportion of patients who received reperfusion, aspirin, beta-blockers, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. On-site feedback presentations were not associated with a larger improvement in AMI care compared to the mailed feedback. Other interventions, such as opinion leaders and patient-directed interventions, may be necessary in order to improve the care of AMI patients.

Impact of quality improvement activities on care for acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between quality improvement activities reported to a peer review organization (PRO) and improvements in quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). DESIGN: Time-series, comparative study of changes in care for AMI patients from 1992 to 1995 in hospitals reporting self-measurement or system changes compared to all other hospitals in the state. SETTING: One-hundred and seventeen acute care hospitals in Iowa. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Patients hospitalized with a principal diagnosis of AMI. INTERVENTIONS: Each hospital was given hospital-specific performance data, statewide aggregate data, and peer comparisons and was asked to provide the PRO with a plan to improve care for AMI patients. MEASUREMENTS: Chart audits were performed before and after the intervention. Quality of care was based on eight explicit process measures of the quality of AMI care (quality indicators). RESULTS: Statewide, quality of care improved on five out of eight quality indicators. Of the 117 hospitals, 44 (38%) reported that they had implemented their own measurement activities or systematic improvements. These 44 hospitals showed significantly greater improvements than the other hospitals in use of aspirin during the hospitalization, recommendations for aspirin at discharge, and prescriptions for beta blockers at discharge. CONCLUSIONS: While quality of care for AMI patients throughout Iowa is improving, the pace of improvement is greatest in hospitals reporting that they are measuring their own performance or implementing systematic changes in care processes. Continued efforts to encourage hospitals to implement these types of improvement activities are warranted.

Are beta-blockers effective in elderly patients who undergo coronary revascularization after acute myocardial infarction?

BACKGROUND: Although randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that beta-blocker therapy is effective in reducing mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), many of these studies excluded patients who undergo coronary revascularization. However, the clinical practice guidelines established by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association recommend that beta-blocker therapy be considered for patients who underwent successful revascularization after AMI. METHODS: Using data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project, we compared the initiation of beta-blocker therapy at discharge in patients aged 65 years or older who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) during their hospitalization for AMI with that of patients who did not undergo revascularization. We then examined whether beta-blocker therapy was associated with lower 1-year mortality between revascularized and nonrevascularized groups. RESULTS: After excluding patients with contraindications to beta-blocker therapy, 84 457 patients remained in the study sample. Of these, 8482 patients underwent CABG, and 13 997 patients underwent PTCA. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, we found that these patients were less likely to initiate beta-blocker therapy after CABG (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.47) or PTCA (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.93) relative to the nonrevascularized group. After adjusting for potential confounders, beta-blockers were significantly associated with lower 1-year mortality in patients who underwent CABG (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89) or PTCA (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.00), similar to that of the non-revascularized group (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: Therapy after AMI with beta-blockers appears to be as effective in reducing 1-year mortality for elderly patients who have undergone CABG or PTCA as for a nonrevascularized group. Our findings suggest that routine use of beta-blockers should be considered for patients who undergo revascularization after AMI.

Beta-blocker therapy for secondary prevention of myocardial infarction in elderly diabetic patients. Results from the National Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the use and association with one-year mortality of beta-blocker therapy for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in elderly diabetic patients and to examine whether beta-blocker therapy was associated with increased rates of hospital readmission for diabetic complications traditionally associated with beta-blockers. BACKGROUND: Although many randomized trials have demonstrated that beta-blockers are effective in reducing mortality after AMI, some experts are concerned about the use of beta-blockers in diabetic patients. Little is known about the effectiveness and complication rate of beta-blocker therapy after AMI for elderly diabetics in community practice settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Cooperative Cardiovascular Project, which contained data abstracted from hospital medical records of Medicare beneficiaries admitted with an AMI during 1994 and 1995. RESULTS: Out of 45,308 patients without contraindications to beta-blocker therapy, 7.4% were insulin-treated diabetics and 18.5% were non-insulin-treated diabetics. Beta-blockers were prescribed at discharge for 45% of insulin-treated diabetics, 48.1% of non-insulin-treated diabetics and 51% of nondiabetics (p < 0.001). After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, diabetics continued to be less likely to receive beta-blockers at discharge compared with nondiabetics (odds ratio [OR] for insulin-treated diabetics 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82 to 0.96; OR for non-insulin-treated diabetics 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.98). After adjusting for potential confounders, beta-blockers were associated with lower one-year mortality for insulin-treated diabetics (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.07), non-insulin-treated diabetics (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88) and nondiabetics (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.94). Beta-blocker therapy was not significantly associated with increased six-month readmission rates for diabetic complications among diabetics and nondiabetics. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blockers are associated with a lower one-year mortality rate for elderly diabetic patients to a similar extent as for nondiabetics, without increased risk of readmission for diabetic complications. Increasing the use of beta-blockers in elderly diabetic patients represents an opportunity to improve the care and outcomes of these patients after AMI.

Early beta-blocker therapy for acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite the evidence supporting the importance of early beta-blocker therapy, this intervention has received little attention as an indicator of quality of care. OBJECTIVES: To determine how often beta-blockers are administered as early treatment of acute myocardial infarction in patients 65 years of age or older, to identify predictors of the decision to use beta-blockers, and to evaluate the association between the early use of beta-blockers and in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Nongovernment, acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Medicare beneficiaries who were 65 years of age or older, were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction in 1994 and 1995, and did not have a contraindication to beta-blocker therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Medical chart review to obtain information about the use of beta-blockers, contraindications to these drugs, patient demographics, and clinical factors. RESULTS: Of the 58 165 patients (from a total of 4414 hospitals), 28 256 (49%) received early beta-blocker therapy. Patients with the highest risk for in-hospital death were the least likely to receive therapy. Patients who received beta-blockers had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than patients who did not receive beta-blockers (odds ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.75 to 0.87]), even after adjustment for baseline differences in demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early beta-blocker therapy was not used for 51% of elderly patients who were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction and did not have a contraindication to this therapy. Increasing the early use of beta-blockers for these patients would provide an excellent opportunity to improve their care and outcomes.

Use of critical pathways to improve the care of patients with acute myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE: While critical pathways have become a popular strategy to improve the quality of care, their effectiveness is not well defined. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of a critical pathway on processes of care and outcomes for Medicare patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional and longitudinal cohort study was made of Medicare patients aged 65 years and older hospitalized at 32 nonfederal Connecticut hospitals with a principal diagnosis of myocardial infarction during two periods: June 1, 1992, to February 28, 1993, and August 1, 1995, to November 30, 1995. The main endpoints of the cross-sectional analyses for the 1995 cohort were the proportion of patients without contraindications who received evidence-based medical therapies, length of stay, and 30-day mortality. Hospitals with specific critical pathways for patients with myocardial infarction were compared with hospitals without critical pathways. The main endpoints of the longitudinal analyses were change between 1992-93 and 1995 in the proportion of patients receiving evidence-based medical therapies, length of stay, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Ten hospitals developed critical pathways between 1992-93 and 1995. Eighteen of 22 nonpathway hospitals employed some combination of standard orders, multidisciplinary teams, or physician champions. Patients admitted to hospitals with critical pathways did not have greater use of aspirin within the first day, during hospitalization, or at discharge; beta-blockers within the first day or at discharge; reperfusion therapy; or use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge in 1995. The mean (+/- SD) length of stay in 1995 was not significantly different between pathway (7.8 +/- 4.6 days) versus nonpathway hospitals (8.0 +/- 4.2 days), and the change in length of stay between 1992-93 and 1995 was 2.2 days for pathway hospitals and 2.3 days for nonpathway hospitals. Patients admitted to critical pathway hospitals had lower 30-day mortality in 1995 (8.6% versus 11.6% for nonpathway hospitals, P = 0.10) and in 1992-93 (12.6% versus 13.8%, P = 0.39), but the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals that instituted critical pathways did not have increased use of proven medical therapies, shorter lengths of stay, or reductions in mortality compared with other hospitals that commonly used alternative approaches to quality improvement among Medicare patients with myocardial infarction.

Performance of the '100 top hospitals': what does the report card report?

We examine whether Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) admitted to one of HCIA-Mercer's "100 top hospitals" received better care or had better outcomes than patients treated in other hospitals. Among four hospital peer groups, the top 100 hospitals had similar thirty-day mortality and use of aspirin, beta-blockers, and reperfusion compared with their peers, but lower lengths-of-stay and in-hospital costs, with similar or lower readmission rates. Our findings suggest that the 100 Top Hospitals study may be better suited for identifying hospitals with higher performance on financial and operating measures than superior clinical performance in treating elderly AMI patients. However, there was no evidence that quality was sacrificed for increased financial efficiency among the top 100 hospitals.

Comparing AMI mortality among hospitals in patients 65 years of age and older: evaluating methods of risk adjustment.

BACKGROUND: Interest in the reporting of risk-adjusted outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction is growing. A useful risk-adjustment model must balance parsimony and ease of data collection with predictive ability. METHODS AND RESULTS: From our analysis of 82 359 patients >/=65 years of age admitted with acute myocardial infarction to 2401 hospitals, we derived a parsimonious model that predicts 30-day mortality. The model was validated on a similar group of 78 699 patients from 2386 hospitals. Of the 73 candidate predictor variables examined, 7 variables describing patient characteristics on arrival were selected for inclusion in the final model: age, cardiac arrest, anterior or lateral location of myocardial infarction, systolic blood pressure, white blood cell count, serum creatinine, and congestive heart failure. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for the final model was 0.77 in the derivation cohort and 0.77 in the validation cohort. The rankings of hospitals by performance (in deciles) with this model were most similar to a comprehensive 27-variable model based on medical chart review and least similar to models based on administrative billing codes. CONCLUSIONS: A simple 7-variable risk model performs as well as more complex models in comparing hospital outcomes for acute myocardial infarction. Although there is a continuing need to improve methods of risk adjustment, our results provide a basis for hospitals to develop a simple approach to compare outcomes.

Geographic variation in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction: the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

CONTEXT: Quality indicators for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction include pharmacologic therapy, reperfusion, and smoking cessation advice, but these therapies may not be administered to all patients who could benefit from them. OBJECTIVE: To assess geographic variation in adherence to quality indicators for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN: Inception cohort using data from the Health Care Financing Administration Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: A total of 186800 Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for treatment of confirmed acute myocardial infarction from February 1994 through July 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence to quality indicators for pharmacologic therapy, reperfusion, and smoking cessation advice for patients judged to be ideal candidates for these therapies. The mean rates of adherence to these quality indicators for the entire United States were determined, and the 20th and 80th percentiles of the age- and sex-adjusted rates for each of 306 hospital referral regions were contrasted (mean rate [20th-80th percentiles]). RESULTS: Aspirin was used frequently both during hospitalization (86.2% [82.6%-90.1%]) and at discharge (77.8% [72.5% -83.9%]). Calcium channel blockers were withheld from most patients with impaired left ventricular function (81.9% [73.6%-90.8%]). Lower rates were seen in the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge (59.3% [49.2%-69.2%]); reperfusion, using thrombolytic therapy or coronary angioplasty (67.2% [59.8%-75.1%]); prescription of beta-blockers at discharge (49.5% [35.8%-61.5%]); and for smoking cessation advice (41.9% [32.8%-51.3%]). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial geographic variation exists in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction, and these gaps between knowledge and practice have important consequences. Therapies with proven benefit for AMI are underused despite strong evidence that their use will result in better patient outcomes.

Do "America's Best Hospitals" perform better for acute myocardial infarction?

BACKGROUND: "America's Best Hospitals," an influential list published annually by U.S. News and World Report, assesses the quality of hospitals. It is not known whether patients admitted to hospitals ranked at the top in cardiology have lower short-term mortality from acute myocardial infarction than those admitted to other hospitals or whether differences in mortality are explained by differential use of recommended therapies. METHODS: Using data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project on 149,177 elderly Medicare beneficiaries with acute myocardial infarction in 1994 or 1995, we examined the care and outcomes of patients admitted to three types of hospitals: those ranked high in cardiology (top-ranked hospitals); hospitals not in the top rank that had on-site facilities for cardiac catheterization, coronary angioplasty, and bypass surgery (similarly equipped hospitals); and the remaining hospitals (non-similarly equipped hospitals). We compared 30-day mortality; the rates of use of aspirin, beta-blockers, and reperfusion; and the relation of differences in rates of therapy to short-term mortality. RESULTS: Admission to a top-ranked hospital was associated with lower adjusted 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.87; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.76 to 1.00; P=0.05 for top-ranked hospitals vs. the others). Among patients without contraindications to therapy, top-ranked hospitals had significantly higher rates of use of aspirin (96.2 percent, as compared with 88.6 percent for similarly equipped hospitals and 83.4 percent for non-similarly equipped hospitals; P<0.01) and beta-blockers (75.0 percent vs. 61.8 percent and 58.7 percent, P<0.01), but lower rates of reperfusion therapy (61.0 percent vs. 70.7 percent and 65.6 percent, P=0.03). The survival advantage associated with admission to top-ranked hospitals was less strong after we adjusted for factors including the use of aspirin and beta-blockers (odds ratio, 0.94; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.08; P=0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Admission to a hospital ranked high on the list of "America's Best Hospitals" was associated with lower 30-day mortality among elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. A substantial portion of the survival advantage may be associated with these hospitals' higher rates of use of aspirin and beta-blocker therapy.

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.

Improving the quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: results from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

CONTEXT: Medicare has a legislative mandate for quality assurance, but the effectiveness of its population-based quality improvement programs has been difficult to establish. OBJECTIVE: To improve the quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN: Quality improvement project with baseline measurement, feedback, remeasurement, and comparison samples. SETTING: All acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Preintervention and postintervention samples included all Medicare patients in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wisconsin discharged with principal diagnoses of acute myocardial infarctions during 2 periods, June 1992 through December 1992 and August 1995 through November 1995. Indicator comparisons were made with a random sample of Medicare patients in the rest of the nation discharged with acute myocardial infarctions from August 1995 through November 1995. Mortality comparisons involved all Medicare patients nationwide with inpatient claims for acute myocardial infarctions during 2 periods, June 1992 through May 1993 and August 1995 through July 1996. INTERVENTION: Data feedback by peer review organizations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality indicators derived from clinical practice guidelines, length of stay, and mortality. RESULTS: Performance on all quality indicators improved significantly in the 4 pilot states. Administration of aspirin during hospitalization in patients without contraindications improved from 84% to 90% (P< .001), and prescription of beta-blockers at discharge improved from 47% to 68% (P < .001). Mortality at 30 days decreased from 18.9% to 17.1% (P = .005) and at 1 year from 32.3% to 29.6% (P < .001). These improvements in quality occurred during a period when median length of stay decreased from 8 days to 6 days. Performance on all quality indicators except reperfusion was better in the pilot states than in the rest of the nation in 1995, and the differences were statistically significant for aspirin use at discharge (P < .001), beta-blocker use (P < .001), and smoking cessation counseling (P = .02). Postinfarction mortality was not significantly different between the pilot states and the rest of the nation during the baseline period, although it was slightly but significantly better in the pilot states during the follow-up period (absolute mortality difference at 1 year, 0.9%; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction has improved in the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project pilot states. Performance on the defined quality indicators appeared to be better in the pilot states than in the rest of the nation in 1995 and was associated with reduced mortality.

Resource use and quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction in Maryland and the District of Columbia: analysis of data from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

This study sought to evaluate the quality of care rendered to Medicare beneficiaries with acute myocardial infarction by establishing the use patterns of well-proven therapies in this population. We analyzed the quality of care rendered to 4300 Medicare beneficiaries seen at Maryland and District of Columbia hospitals with retrospectively confirmed acute myocardial infarction by evaluating the use of proven therapies. The proportion of patients ideal for therapies ranged from 10% for reperfusion to 100% for smoking cessation counseling. For ideal patients the following therapies were implemented: aspirin (87%), reperfusion therapy (64%), beta-blockers on discharge (60%), and smoking cessation counseling (41%). A substantial proportion of Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction has one or more relative or absolute contraindications to standard regimens and therefore are not ideal therapeutic candidates. In the group of ideal patients, those with no therapeutic contraindications, a significant proportion do not receive these treatments.

Quality improvement at the national level. Lessons from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

Most quality improvement projects address care delivered in one service of a hospital, such as the operating suite or the obstetrics service. Some projects are collaborative efforts involving groups of hospitals with similar interests. Few projects attempt to change care on a population basis (i.e., involving all providers in entire states or the nation as a whole.) The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project (CCP), sponsored by the Health Care Financing Administration, is attempting to improve care for all Medicare patients suffering from acute myocardial infarctions nation-wide. The CCP has been active since 1993 and, in a pilot project, has demonstrated that care can be improved on a population basis (i.e., in four entire states). This article explores the lessons learned from the CCP pilot and from the evolving CCP national experience.

Quality improvement activity directed at the national level: examples from the Health Care Financing Administration.

Quality improvement projects coordinated by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) are currently underway to improve the care provided to Medicare beneficiaries. We describe five national quality improvement projects, the End Stage Renal Disease Core Indicators Project, the National Anemia Cooperative Project, the Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project, and the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. We outline the types of intervention strategies employed and compare the approaches used for fee-for-service sites and for managed care plans.