ArticleThe Permanente journal2010
Reasons for not meeting coronary artery disease targets of care in ambulatory practice.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insight into Polyphenol and Gut Microbiota Crosstalk: Are Their Metabolites the Key to Understand Protective Effects against Metabolic Disorders?Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Adherence to Statin Therapy Among US Adults Between 2007 and 2014.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFour targets of care: control of blood pressure, control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, taking aspirin daily, and not using tobacco improve outcomes for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We sought to identify why, in a large multispecialty group, these targets were not being met in patients with CAD.
methodsWe thus conducted a retrospective review of patient records in the group practice's CAD registry, which is updated quarterly.
resultsOf a random selection of 14,973 patients in the CAD registry, 353 charts were consecutively reviewed until theoretic saturation was achieved-that is, until no new information was found. We could not find any evidence of CAD in 14 patients, and we considered that all four targets had been met for 169 patients. The most frequent reasons for not meeting all targets of care among the 170 remaining patients were 1) the patient was in for a visit and the care team failed to address an unmet target of care (n = 98), 2) the patient was asked to come back for follow-up care but did not (n = 28), and 3) the patient declined an intervention that was offered (n = 14). Blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were the targets that were most frequently out of range.
conclusionGiving the health care team access to tools with which they can identify the concurrent care needs of their patients could significantly increase the proportion of patients with CAD for whom care targets are met. Lists generated by these tools would also be significantly more accurate than lists generated from quarterly reports.
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.