Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA; Cardiovascular Division and Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; and VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA.
Circ Heart Fail. 2013 Sep 1;6(5):890-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.000064. Epub 2013 Aug 7.
There is an urgent need to improve outcomes and reduce costs for patients with heart failure (HF). Physician volume is associated with better outcomes for patients undergoing procedures, but its association with outcomes for medically managed diseases, such as HF, is not well understood.
We used Medicare inpatient data in 2009 to examine all HF admissions to acute care hospitals in the United States. We divided physicians into quintiles according to their volume of patients with HF. We used patient-level regression to compare 30-day risk-adjusted mortality, readmissions, and costs across volume groups, controlling for patient, physician, and hospital characteristics. We examined physician volume within strata of hospital volume and physician specialty. Patients cared for by the high-volume physicians had lower mortality than those by the low-volume physicians (8.9% versus 9.7%; P<0.001); this relationship was strongest in low-volume hospitals. In contrast, patients cared for by high-volume physicians had higher readmission rates (25.8% versus 21.5%; P<0001); this relationship was similar across hospital volume groups. Finally, costs were higher for the high-volume physicians ($8982 versus $8731; P=0.002, a difference that was consistent across hospital volume groups). The relationship between physician volume and mortality was strongest for internists (9.2% versus 10.6%; P<0.001) and weakest for cardiologists (6.4% versus 6.7%; P=0.485).
Physician volume is associated with lower mortality for HF, particularly in low-volume institutions and among noncardiologist physicians. Our findings suggest that clinician expertise may play an important role in HF care.
迫切需要改善心力衰竭(HF)患者的预后并降低其医疗成本。医师的工作量与接受手术治疗的患者的预后改善相关,但医师工作量与接受药物治疗的疾病(如 HF)的预后之间的关联尚不清楚。
我们使用 2009 年 Medicare 住院数据,调查了美国所有急性护理医院的 HF 入院患者。我们根据 HF 患者的数量将医生分为五组。我们使用患者水平回归,在控制患者、医生和医院特征的情况下,比较了不同工作量组的 30 天风险调整死亡率、再入院率和费用。我们还在医院工作量和医生专业的分层中检查了医生的工作量。由高工作量医生治疗的患者的死亡率低于由低工作量医生治疗的患者(8.9%比 9.7%;P<0.001);这种关系在低工作量医院中最强。相比之下,由高工作量医生治疗的患者的再入院率较高(25.8%比 21.5%;P<0001);这种关系在不同医院工作量组中相似。最后,高工作量医生的费用更高($8982 比 $8731;P=0.002,这一差异在不同医院工作量组中是一致的)。内科医生(9.2%比 10.6%;P<0.001)和心脏病专家(6.4%比 6.7%;P=0.485)之间的医师工作量与死亡率之间的关系最强。
医师的工作量与 HF 的死亡率降低相关,特别是在低工作量机构和非心脏病专家医生中。我们的研究结果表明,临床医生的专业知识可能在 HF 治疗中发挥重要作用。