Comparison of GE Centricity Electronic Medical Record database and National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey findings on the prevalence of major conditions in the United States.

The study objective was to facilitate investigations by assessing the external validity and generalizability of the Centricity Electronic Medical Record (EMR) database and analytical results to the US population using the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) data and results as an appropriate validation resource. Demographic and diagnostic data from the NAMCS were compared to similar data from the Centricity EMR database, and the impact of the different methods of data collection was analyzed. Compared to NAMCS survey data on visits, Centricity EMR data shows higher proportions of visits by younger patients and by females. Other comparisons suggest more acute visits in Centricity and more chronic visits in NAMCS. The key finding from the Centricity EMR is more visits for the 13 chronic conditions highlighted in the NAMCS survey, with virtually all comparisons showing higher proportions in Centricity. Although data and results from Centricity and NAMCS are not perfectly comparable, once techniques are employed to deal with limitations, Centricity data appear more sensitive in capturing diagnoses, especially chronic diagnoses. Likely explanations include differences in data collection using the EMR versus the survey, particularly more comprehensive medical documentation requirements for the Centricity EMR and its inclusion of laboratory results and medication data collected over time, compared to the survey, which focused on the primary reason for that visit. It is likely that Centricity data reflect medical problems more accurately and provide a more accurate estimate of the distribution of diagnoses in ambulatory visits in the United States. Further research should address potential methodological approaches to maximize the validity and utility of EMR databases.

Obesity management interventions: a review of the evidence.

The burden of disease associated with the obesity epidemic shortens lives, and prevalence is accelerating. As with other chronic diseases, improved outcomes are associated with effective self-management of obesity across the life span. The disease of obesity, then, fits squarely within the disease management and chronic care models. This article reviews selected interventions, described in peer-reviewed literature, designed to achieve significant weight loss for individuals identified as overweight or obese. The study objective is to provide an overview of the full range of methods and models for weight loss, including some available without medical supervision. The intended audience includes individuals and organizations with an expressed interest in disease management and the chronic care models. Our review identified promising lines of investigation for future research that span diverse medical disciplines applied to obesity. The quality of the studies included in our review was uneven, and compromises the current evidence for effectiveness and efficacy. Generally, our results showed that combination approaches-surgical or pharmacologic, combined with a behavioral intervention-were most likely to be effective.

Effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker therapy after hospital discharge on subsequent rehospitalization for acute myocardial infarction and heart failure.

American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) therapy following acute myocardial infarction (MI) or development of heart failure (HF). This study estimated the effects of initiating these therapies after hospitalization for MI or HF on subsequent 1-year rehospitalization rates for MI or HF. A retrospective multivariate analysis of medical claims for 14,327 patients receiving and 7905 not receiving an ACEI or ARB after discharge for MI or HF was conducted. Rehospitalization for MI or HF was lower for treated vs untreated patients (MI: odds ratio [OR]=0.53, P<.001; HF: OR=0.52, P<.001). Rehospitalization was lower in treated patients with high medication compliance (medication possession ratio [MPR]>80%) and medium compliance (MPR 40%-79%) vs patients with low compliance (ORs for MI: high=0.54, medium=0.69; P<.001); ORs for HF: high=0.38, medium=0.62; P<.001). In conclusion, ACEI or ARB therapy initiated after hospitalization for MI or HF reduced risk of rehospitalization, and greater risk reduction was achieved with higher medication compliance.