• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对美国医生专业对冠心病和心力衰竭治疗效果的系统评价。

A systematic review of the effects of physician specialty on the treatment of coronary disease and heart failure in the United States.

作者信息

Go A S, Rao R K, Dauterman K W, Massie B M

机构信息

Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program (Northern California), Oakland, California 94611-5714, USA.

出版信息

Am J Med. 2000 Feb 15;108(3):216-26. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00430-1.

DOI:10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00430-1
PMID:10723976
Abstract

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of physician specialty on the knowledge, management, and outcomes of patients with coronary disease or heart failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE from 1980 to 1997, as well as bibliographic references to articles about the effects of physician specialty on the knowledge, treatment, and outcomes of patients with coronary disease or heart failure in the United States.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles met our criteria for inclusion (including eight that involved knowledge or self-reported practices, 14 that described actual practice patterns, and six that measured clinical outcomes). Cardiologists were more knowledgeable than generalist physicians about the optimal evaluation and management of coronary disease but not about the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for heart failure. Patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction were more likely to receive proven medical therapies, and possibly had improved outcomes, if they were treated by cardiologists. The use of lipid-lowering drugs after myocardial infarction was also more common among patients of cardiologists. ACE inhibitor use for heart failure was probably greater, and short-term readmission rates were lower, with cardiology care.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with coronary disease or heart failure in the United States who are treated by cardiologists appear more likely to receive evidence-based care and probably have better outcomes. Investigation of collaborative models of care and innovative efforts to improve the use of proven therapies by physicians are needed.

摘要

目的

评估医生专业对冠心病或心力衰竭患者的知识、管理及治疗结果的影响。

材料与方法

我们对1980年至1997年的MEDLINE进行了系统检索,并查阅了有关美国医生专业对冠心病或心力衰竭患者的知识、治疗及治疗结果影响的文章的参考文献。

结果

24篇文章符合我们的纳入标准(包括8篇涉及知识或自我报告做法的文章、14篇描述实际治疗模式的文章以及6篇衡量临床结果的文章)。心脏病专家在冠心病的最佳评估和管理方面比全科医生知识更丰富,但在使用血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)抑制剂治疗心力衰竭方面并非如此。不稳定型心绞痛或心肌梗死患者若由心脏病专家治疗,更有可能接受经过验证的药物治疗,且治疗结果可能更好。心肌梗死后使用降脂药物在心脏病专家的患者中也更为常见。接受心脏病治疗时,ACE抑制剂用于心力衰竭的情况可能更多,短期再入院率更低。

结论

在美国,由心脏病专家治疗的冠心病或心力衰竭患者似乎更有可能接受循证治疗,且治疗结果可能更好。需要对协作治疗模式进行调查,并做出创新努力以提高医生对经过验证的治疗方法的使用。

相似文献

1
A systematic review of the effects of physician specialty on the treatment of coronary disease and heart failure in the United States.对美国医生专业对冠心病和心力衰竭治疗效果的系统评价。
Am J Med. 2000 Feb 15;108(3):216-26. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00430-1.
2
Differences in generalist and specialist physicians' knowledge and use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for congestive heart failure.全科医生和专科医生在充血性心力衰竭中使用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂的知识及应用方面的差异。
J Gen Intern Med. 1997 Sep;12(9):523-30. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1997.07105.x.
3
Differences between patients with heart failure treated by cardiologists, internists, family physicians, and other physicians: analysis of a large, statewide database.心脏病专家、内科医生、家庭医生及其他医生治疗的心力衰竭患者之间的差异:一项基于全州范围大型数据库的分析
Am Heart J. 2000 Mar;139(3):491-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(00)90093-0.
4
Self-reported differences between cardiologists and heart failure specialists in the management of chronic heart failure.心脏病专家与心力衰竭专科医生在慢性心力衰竭管理方面的自我报告差异。
Am Heart J. 1999 Jul;138(1 Pt 1):100-7. doi: 10.1016/s0002-8703(99)70253-x.
5
Care and outcomes of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction by physician specialty: the effects of comorbidity and functional limitations.按医生专业划分的老年急性心肌梗死患者的护理与结局:合并症和功能受限的影响
Am J Med. 2000 Apr 15;108(6):460-9. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(00)00331-4.
6
Care and outcomes of patients newly hospitalized for heart failure in the community treated by cardiologists compared with other specialists.与其他专科医生相比,心脏病专家治疗的社区中新住院心力衰竭患者的护理及治疗结果。
Circulation. 2003 Jul 15;108(2):184-91. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000080290.39027.48. Epub 2003 Jun 23.
7
Outcome following acute myocardial infarction: are differences among physician specialties the result of quality of care or case mix?急性心肌梗死后的结局:医师专业之间的差异是医疗质量还是病例组合的结果?
Arch Intern Med. 1999 Jul 12;159(13):1429-36. doi: 10.1001/archinte.159.13.1429.
8
Resource use and survival of patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure: differences in care by specialty of the attending physician. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.充血性心力衰竭住院患者的资源利用与生存情况:主治医生专业导致的护理差异。SUPPORT研究组。了解治疗结果和风险的预后及偏好研究。
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Feb 1;132(3):191-200. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-132-3-200002010-00004.
9
Generalists and specialists caring for patients with heart disease: united we stand, divided we fall.
Am J Med. 2000 Feb 15;108(3):259-61. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00455-6.
10
Treatment of patients admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure: specialty-related disparities in practice patterns and outcomes.因充血性心力衰竭入院患者的治疗:实践模式和治疗结果中的专业相关差异。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997 Sep;30(3):733-8. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00214-3.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of Admission Ward on Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.入院病房对非ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者长期预后的影响
J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 15;14(4):1284. doi: 10.3390/jcm14041284.
2
Asian adult sleep medicine fellowship training curriculum: one curriculum, many contexts.亚洲成人睡眠医学专科培训课程:同一课程,多样情境。
J Clin Sleep Med. 2025 Apr 1;21(4):627-638. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.11484.
3
Cultures of Practice: Specialty-Specific Differences in End-of-Life Conversations.实践文化:临终谈话中的专业差异
Palliat Med Rep. 2021 Mar 24;2(1):71-83. doi: 10.1089/pmr.2020.0054. eCollection 2021 Mar.
4
African Americans Are Less Likely to Receive Care by a Cardiologist During an Intensive Care Unit Admission for Heart Failure.非裔美国人在因心力衰竭入住重症监护病房期间,接受心脏病专家治疗的可能性较低。
JACC Heart Fail. 2018 May;6(5):413-420. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.02.015.
5
Health Status Variation Across Practices in Outpatients With Heart Failure: Insights From the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) Registry.心力衰竭门诊患者不同医疗实践中的健康状况差异:来自CHAMP-HF(改变心力衰竭患者管理)注册研究的见解
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Apr;11(4):e004668. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.004668.
6
Discharge Processes and 30-Day Readmission Rates of Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure on General Medicine and Cardiology Services.普通内科和心内科服务中因心力衰竭住院患者的出院流程及30天再入院率
Am J Cardiol. 2018 May 1;121(9):1076-1080. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.01.027. Epub 2018 Feb 7.
7
A participatory model of the paradox of primary care.初级保健悖论的参与式模型。
Ann Fam Med. 2015 Sep;13(5):456-65. doi: 10.1370/afm.1841.
8
Mortality and readmission rates in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure: a comparison between cardiology and general-medicine service outcomes in an underserved population.因急性失代偿性心力衰竭住院患者的死亡率和再入院率:在服务不足人群中,心脏病科与普通内科服务结果的比较
Clin Cardiol. 2015 Mar;38(3):131-8. doi: 10.1002/clc.22372. Epub 2015 Feb 18.
9
Development and validation of algorithms for heart failure patient care: a Delphi study.心力衰竭患者护理算法的开发与验证:一项德尔菲研究。
Singapore Med J. 2015 Apr;56(4):217-23. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2014190.
10
Impact of cardiology referral: clinical outcomes and factors associated with physicians' adherence to recommendations.心脏病学转诊的影响:临床结果及与医生遵循建议相关的因素
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2014 Dec;69(10):666-71. doi: 10.6061/clinics/2014(10)03.