Trial reportAnnals of surgery2004
Alabama coronary artery bypass grafting project: results from phase II of a statewide quality improvement initiative.
Trial report in Annals of surgery, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of best practice meetings on clinical outcomes in surgical and oncological care: a scoping review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Data-driven coaching to improve statewide outcomes in CABG: before and after interventional study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2024Article
- Relationship between vein graft failure and subsequent clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass surgery.Circulation · 2012Article
- Review
- Postoperative inotrope and vasopressor use following CABG: outcome data from the CAPS-care study.Journal of cardiac surgery · 2011Article
- A regional quality improvement effort to increase beta blocker administration before vascular surgery.Journal of vascular surgery · 2011Article
- Disseminating quality improvement: study protocol for a large cluster-randomized trial.Implementation science : IS · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/
backgroundThis report describes the first round of results for Phase II of the Alabama CABG Project, a regional quality improvement initiative.
methodsCharts submitted by all hospitals in Alabama performing CABG (ICD-9 codes 36.10-36.20) were reviewed by a Clinical Data Abstraction Center (CDAC) (preintervention 1999-2000; postintervention 2000-2001). Variables that described quality in Phase I were abstracted for Phase II and data describing the new variables of beta-blocker use and lipid management were collected. Data samples collected onsite by participating hospitals were used for rapid cycle improvement in Phase II.
resultsCDAC data (n = 1927 cases in 1999; n = 2001 cases in 2000) showed that improvements from Phase I in aspirin prescription, internal mammary artery use, and duration of intubation persisted in Phase II. During Phase II, use of beta-blockers before, during, or after CABG increased from 65% to 76% of patients (P < 0.05). Appropriate lipid management, an aggregate variable, occurred in 91% of patients before and 91% after the educational intervention. However, there were improvements in 3 of 5 subcategories for lipid management (documenting a lipid disorder [52%-57%], initiating drug therapy [45%-53%], and dietary counseling [74%-91%]; P < 0.05).
conclusionsIn Phase II, this statewide process-oriented quality improvement program added two new measures of quality. Achievements of quality improvement from Phase I persisted in Phase II, and improvements were seen in the new variables of lipid management and perioperative use of beta-blockers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.