Rating the appropriateness of coronary angiography, coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass grafting: the ACRE study. Appropriateness of Coronary Revascularisation study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies investigating the appropriateness of invasive management of coronary disease had not reported the internal consistency of their ratings and may now be out of date. The aim of this study was to measure the influence of clinical factors on contemporary ratings of the appropriateness of coronary angiography, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in the Appropriateness of Coronary Revascularisation (ACRE) study. METHODS: The Delphi-RAND technique was used, in which an expert panel (four cardiologists, three cardiothoracic surgeons, a general physician and a general practitioner), meeting in 1995, rated mutually exclusive indications (n = 2178 for angiography, n = 995 for PTCA and n = 984 for CABG). The main outcome measures were the appropriateness category (inappropriate, uncertain or appropriate) for each of the three procedures and treatment preference. RESULTS: For revascularization, the strongest determinant of inappropriateness was coronary anatomy. The odds ratio (OR) for inappropriate PTCA was 10.6 (95 per cent confidence interval (CI) 4.8-23.5) for the effect of left main stem or three-vessel disease versus single-vessel disease, and for CABG it was 0.06 (95 per cent CI 0.03-0.15). The number of diseased vessels was strongly related to preference for medical, PTCA or CABG treatment (p for linear trend <0.001). Mild versus severe anginal symptoms were associated with inappropriate angiography (OR 2.0 (95 per cent CI 0.9-9.8), although this effect was stronger when only the cardiologists' ratings were considered (OR 10.1 (95 per cent CI 2.4-42.6)). CONCLUSION: These are the first UK ratings of appropriateness covering all three procedures. The associations with clinical factors provide evidence of the internal consistency of these ratings. Prospective validation of these ratings against clinical outcomes is under way in the ACRE study.

Utilization review for Medicaid diagnosis-related group systems: practice, innovation, and lessons of experience.

Utilization review practices, innovations and trends for the 21 states using diagnosis-related groups for Medicaid during 1992 are described. According to this descriptive survey, Medicaid inpatient utilization review programs vary widely in authority, approach and focus, reflecting state payment system incentives, health and hospital system characteristics, and provider practice norms. More than half of the states with Medicaid diagnosis-related group systems contract with a Medicare Peer Review Organization. State programs are developing complementary clinical and data analytic approaches, advised by multidisciplinary utilization review committees, and are moving from random review to strategies that focus on specific types of admissions/procedures, and shift as provider practices and utilization patterns change. Utilization review strategies also support payment incentives and system features, e.g., by targeting outliers, readmissions and transfers, and short stays. Overall, programs are becoming more flexible, targeted, and interactive. Trends and suggestions for refining utilization review programs for diagnosis-related group systems are presented.