Ross Michael A, Amsterdam Ezra, Peacock W Frank, Graff Louis, Fesmire Francis, Garvey J Lee, Kelly Sue, Holmes Kay, Karunaratne H B, Toth Margaret, Dadkhah Shahriar, McCord James
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2008 Jul 15;102(2):120-4. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.03.028. Epub 2008 May 14.
The aim of this study was determine whether hospitals accredited by the Society of Chest Pain Centers hospitals (accredited chest pain centers [ACPCs]) are associated with better performance regarding Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services core measures for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) than nonaccredited hospitals. The study was a retrospective, observational cohort study of hospitals reporting Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services core measures for AMI from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2005, on the basis of the presence or absence of Society of Chest Pain Centers accreditation. Data were obtained from the Web sites of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Hospital Compare), Society of Chest Pain Centers listings, and the American Hospital Directory. Groups were compared in terms of demographics and mean percentage compliance with all 8 AMI core measures. Student's t test, chi-square analysis, and logistic regression were used to analyze bivariate relations. Multivariate logistic regression models used a propensity-score adjustment factor. Of the 4,197 hospitals that reported core measures for AMI, 178 (4%) were accredited and 4,019 (96%) were not. ACPCs had been accredited for an average of 12 months and were larger (378 vs 204 beds), more often teaching hospitals (52% vs 30%), and more often urban (95% vs 69%) (all p <0.0001). There were 395,250 patients with AMIs, of whom 55,418 (14%) presented to ACPCs and 339,832 (86%) presented to nonaccredited hospitals. There was significantly greater compliance with all 8 AMI core measures at ACPCs (p <0.0001), except for lytic therapy <30 minutes after arrival (p = 0.04), for which unadjusted performance was the same. In conclusion, ACPCs were associated with better compliance with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services core measures and saw a greater proportion of patients with AMIs.
本研究的目的是确定胸痛中心协会认证的医院(认证胸痛中心[ACPC])与未认证医院相比,在医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心急性心肌梗死(AMI)核心指标方面是否具有更好的表现。该研究是一项回顾性观察队列研究,研究对象为2005年1月1日至2005年12月31日期间报告医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心AMI核心指标的医院,根据是否有胸痛中心协会认证进行分组。数据来自医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心网站(医院比较)、胸痛中心协会列表以及美国医院名录。对两组在人口统计学特征以及所有8项AMI核心指标的平均达标率方面进行比较。采用学生t检验、卡方分析和逻辑回归分析双变量关系。多变量逻辑回归模型使用倾向得分调整因子。在报告AMI核心指标的4197家医院中,178家(4%)获得认证,4019家(96%)未获得认证。ACPC获得认证的平均时长为12个月,规模更大(378张床位对204张床位),教学医院比例更高(52%对30%),城市医院比例更高(95%对69%)(所有p<0.0001)。共有395250例AMI患者,其中55418例(14%)就诊于ACPC,339832例(86%)就诊于未认证医院。ACPC在所有8项AMI核心指标上的达标率显著更高(p<0.0001),但到达后30分钟内溶栓治疗这一指标除外(p = 0.04),其未调整表现相同。总之,ACPC与更好地符合医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心核心指标相关,且接诊的AMI患者比例更高。