Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29299607›Full record

Observational studyJAMA cardiology2018

Comparison of Accessibility, Cost, and Quality of Elective Coronary Revascularization Between Veterans Affairs and Community Care Hospitals.

Paul G Barnett, Juliette S Hong, Evan Carey, Gary K Grunwald, Karen Joynt Maddox, Thomas M Maddox

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Performance of the Veterans Choice Program for Improving Access to Colonoscopy at a Tertiary VA Facility.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Paul G BarnettVeterans Affairs Health Economics Resource Center, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, California.
Juliette S HongVeterans Affairs Health Economics Resource Center, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, California.
Evan CareyDepartment of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Gary K GrunwaldDepartment of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Karen Joynt MaddoxCardiology Division, John T. Milliken Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Thomas M MaddoxCardiology Division, John T. Milliken Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
Washington University in St. Louis · USCenter for Innovation · USColorado School of Public Health · USUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · USVA Palo Alto Health Care System · US

Funding

THE IMPACT OF PUBLIC REPORTING ON OUTCOMES AND CASE SELECTION FOR PCIK23HL109177 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI JOYNT MADDOX, KAREN ELLEN · 2011 to 2017
$691k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL109177
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The Veterans Affairs (VA) Community Care (CC) Program supplements VA care with community-based medical services. However, access gains and value provided by CC have not been well described. Objectives: To compare the access, cost, and quality of elective coronary revascularization procedures between VA and CC hospitals and to evaluate if procedural volume or publicly reported quality data can be used to identify high-value care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational cohort study of veterans younger than 65 years undergoing an elective coronary revascularization, controlling for differences in risk factors using propensity adjustment. The setting was VA and CC hospitals. Participants were veterans undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and veterans undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) procedures between October 1, 2008, and September 30, 2011. The analysis was conducted between July 2014 and July 2017. Exposures: Receipt of an elective coronary revascularization at a VA vs CC facility. Main Outcomes and Measures: Access to care as measured by travel distance, 30-day mortality, and costs. Results: In the 3 years ending on September 30, 2011, a total of 13 237 elective PCIs (79.1% at the VA) and 5818 elective CABG procedures (83.6% at the VA) were performed in VA or CC hospitals among veterans meeting study inclusion criteria. On average, use of CC was associated with reduced net travel by 53.6 miles for PCI and by 73.3 miles for CABG surgery compared with VA-only care. Adjusted 30-day mortality after PCI was higher in CC compared with VA (1.54% for CC vs 0.65% for VA, P < .001) but was similar after CABG surgery (1.33% for CC vs 1.51% for VA, P = .74). There were no differences in adjusted 30-day readmission rates for PCI (7.04% for CC vs 7.73% for VA, P = .66) or CABG surgery (8.13% for CC vs 7.00% for VA, P = .28). The mean adjusted PCI cost was higher in CC ($22 025 for CC vs $15 683 for VA, P < .001). The mean adjusted CABG cost was lower in CC ($55 526 for CC vs $63 144 for VA, P < .01). Neither procedural volume nor publicly reported mortality data identified hospitals that provided higher-value care with the exception that CABG mortality was lower in small-volume CC hospitals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this veteran cohort, PCIs performed in CC hospitals were associated with shorter travel distance but with higher mortality, higher costs, and minimal travel savings compared with VA hospitals. The CABG procedures performed in CC hospitals were associated with shorter travel distance, similar mortality, and lower costs. As the VA considers expansion of the CC program, ongoing assessments of value and access gains are essential to optimize veteran outcomes and VA spending.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCohort StudiesCommunity Health ServicesCoronary Artery BypassCosts and Cost AnalysisElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial RevascularizationPatient ReadmissionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID29299607
PMCPMC5838592
OpenAlexW2782005769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.