Wennberg D, Dickens J, Soule D, Kellett M, Malenka D, Robb J, Ryan T, Bradley W, Vaitkus P, Hearne M, O'Connor G, Hillman R
Maine Medical Center, Portland, USA.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 1997 Apr;2(2):75-80. doi: 10.1177/135581969700200204.
Utilization rates of coronary angiography and cardiac revascularization have been found to vary between areas. This study addresses the relationship between resource supply and procedure rates.
We compared the association of per capita catheterization laboratories, per capita cardiologists and multi-provider markets (where more than one hospital offers coronary angiography services) with the utilization rates for angiography and cardiac revascularization in northern New England, USA. Administrative data were used to capture invasive cardiac procedures. Small area analyses were used to create coronary angiography service areas. Linear regression methods were used to measure associations between the resource supply and utilization rates.
Variation in the use of invasive cardiac procedures was strongly associated with the population-based availability of catheterization facilities and multi-provider markets and unrelated to cardiologist supply or need (as reflected in the hospitalization rates for myocardial infarction). In the multivariate model, an increase of 1 catheterization laboratory per 100,000 population was associated with an increase in the angiography rate of 1.62 per 1000 population; those service areas with multi-provider markets were associated with an additional increase in the angiography rate of 1.27 per 1000 population (R2 = 0.84, P = 0.0006). There was a moderately strong relationship between the catheterization laboratories per capita and the revascularization rates (R2 = 0.43, P = 0.029). Angiography rates were highly associated with cardiac revascularization rates: an increase in the angiography rate of 1 per 1000 population was associated with a 0.46 per 1000 increase in the cardiac revascularization rate (R2 = 0.85, P = 0.0001).
Our work suggests that current efforts to address variation in cardiac procedures through activities such as appropriateness criteria, guidelines and utilization review are misdirected and should be redirected towards capacity, in this case the supply of catheterization facilities.
冠状动脉造影术和心脏血运重建术的利用率在不同地区存在差异。本研究探讨资源供应与手术率之间的关系。
我们比较了美国新英格兰北部人均导管实验室、人均心脏病专家以及多供应商市场(即不止一家医院提供冠状动脉造影服务的市场)与冠状动脉造影术和心脏血运重建术利用率之间的关联。利用行政数据获取侵入性心脏手术信息。采用小区域分析方法创建冠状动脉造影服务区。运用线性回归方法测量资源供应与利用率之间的关联。
侵入性心脏手术使用情况的差异与基于人口的导管设施可用性和多供应商市场密切相关,与心脏病专家的供应或需求无关(如心肌梗死住院率所反映)。在多变量模型中,每10万人口增加1个导管实验室与每1000人口冠状动脉造影率增加1.62相关;那些有多供应商市场的服务区与每1000人口冠状动脉造影率额外增加1.27相关(R2 = 0.84,P = 0.0006)。人均导管实验室与血运重建率之间存在中度强相关(R2 = 0.43,P = 0.029)。冠状动脉造影率与心脏血运重建率高度相关:每1000人口冠状动脉造影率增加1与每1000人口心脏血运重建率增加0.46相关(R2 = 0.85,P = 0.0001)。
我们的研究表明,当前通过诸如适宜性标准、指南和利用审查等活动来解决心脏手术差异的努力方向有误,应转向能力方面,在这种情况下是导管设施的供应。