• 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

《2000-2016 年公共绩效报告对冠状动脉旁路移植术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗相关市场份额、死亡率和患者构成结果的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析》。

The Impact of Public Performance Reporting on Market Share, Mortality, and Patient Mix Outcomes Associated With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (2000-2016): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic., Australia.

出版信息

Med Care. 2018 Nov;56(11):956-966. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000990.

DOI:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000990
PMID:30234769
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6226216/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Public performance reporting (PPR) of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes aim to improve the quality of care in hospitals, surgeons and to inform consumer choice. Past CABG and PCI studies have showed mixed effects of PPR on quality and selection. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of PPR on market share, mortality, and patient mix outcomes associated with CABG and PCI.

METHODS

Six online databases and 8 previous reviews were searched for the period 2000-2016. Data extraction, quality assessment, systematic critical synthesis, and meta-analysis (where possible) were carried out on included studies.

RESULTS

In total, 22 relevant articles covering mortality (n=19), patient mix (n=14), and market share (n=6) outcomes were identified. Meta-analyses showed that PPR led to a near but not significant reduction in short-term mortality for both CABG and PCI. PPR on CABG showed a positive effect on market share for hospitals (3 of 6 studies) and low-performing surgeons (2 of 2 studies). Five of 6 PCI studies found that high-risk patients were less likely to be treated in States with PPR.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that PPR reduces mortality rates in CABG/PCI-treated patients. The significance of there being no strong evidence, in the period 2000-2016, should be considered. There is need for both further development of PPR practice and further research into the intended and unintended consequences of PPR.

摘要

目的

公开的冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)结果报告旨在提高医院、外科医生的医疗质量,并为消费者选择提供信息。过去的 CABG 和 PCI 研究表明,公开报告对质量和选择的影响不一。本研究旨在对公开报告对 CABG 和 PCI 相关的市场份额、死亡率和患者构成结果的影响进行系统评价和荟萃分析。

方法

在 2000 年至 2016 年期间,检索了 6 个在线数据库和 8 个之前的综述。对纳入的研究进行数据提取、质量评估、系统批判性综合和荟萃分析(如有可能)。

结果

共确定了 22 篇与死亡率(n=19)、患者构成(n=14)和市场份额(n=6)相关的相关文章。荟萃分析显示,公开报告对 CABG 和 PCI 的短期死亡率均有降低的趋势,但无统计学意义。CABG 的公开报告对医院(6 项研究中的 3 项)和低绩效外科医生(2 项研究中的 2 项)的市场份额有积极影响。6 项 PCI 研究中有 5 项发现,高风险患者在实施公开报告的州接受治疗的可能性较低。

结论

有证据表明,公开报告降低了 CABG/PCI 治疗患者的死亡率。在 2000-2016 年期间,没有强有力的证据,这一情况值得考虑。需要进一步发展公开报告实践,并进一步研究公开报告的预期和非预期后果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/996b/6226216/1a8b663491e3/mlr-56-956-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/996b/6226216/db794d93c4b6/mlr-56-956-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/996b/6226216/1a8b663491e3/mlr-56-956-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/996b/6226216/db794d93c4b6/mlr-56-956-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/996b/6226216/1a8b663491e3/mlr-56-956-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
The Impact of Public Performance Reporting on Market Share, Mortality, and Patient Mix Outcomes Associated With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (2000-2016): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.《2000-2016 年公共绩效报告对冠状动脉旁路移植术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗相关市场份额、死亡率和患者构成结果的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析》。
Med Care. 2018 Nov;56(11):956-966. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000990.
2
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Native Coronary Arteries Versus Bypass Grafts in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者中的应用:来自退伍军人事务部临床评估、报告和跟踪计划的见解。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 May 9;9(9):884-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.034. Epub 2016 Apr 13.
3
Impact of public reporting of coronary artery bypass graft surgery performance data on market share, mortality, and patient selection.公布冠状动脉旁路移植术绩效数据对市场份额、死亡率和患者选择的影响。
Med Care. 2011 Dec;49(12):1118-25. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182358c78.
4
Influence of previous percutaneous coronary intervention on clinical outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of comparative studies†.既往经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对冠状动脉旁路移植术临床结局的影响:一项比较研究的荟萃分析†
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2015 Apr;20(4):531-7; discussion 537. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivu449. Epub 2015 Jan 11.
5
Has the difference in mortality between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting in people with heart disease and diabetes changed over the years? A systematic review and meta-regression.多年来,患有心脏病和糖尿病的患者接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的死亡率差异是否发生了变化?一项系统评价和Meta回归分析。
BMJ Open. 2015 Dec 30;5(12):e010055. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010055.
6
Coronary artery bypass graft surgery vs percutaneous interventions in coronary revascularization: a systematic review.冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在冠状动脉血运重建中的比较:一项系统评价。
JAMA. 2013 Nov 20;310(19):2086-95. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281718.
7
Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.比较糖尿病患者行冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的效果:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2013 Dec;1(4):317-28. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70089-5. Epub 2013 Sep 13.
8
Left main coronary artery stenosis: a meta-analysis of drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting.左主干冠状动脉狭窄:药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术的荟萃分析。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Dec;6(12):1219-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.07.008.
9
Three-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with heart failure: from the CREDO-Kyoto percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass graft registry cohort-2†.心力衰竭患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和冠状动脉旁路移植术后的三年结局:来自CREDO-京都经皮冠状动脉介入治疗/冠状动脉旁路移植登记队列-2†
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Feb;47(2):316-21; discussion 321. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu131. Epub 2014 Mar 23.
10
Coronary artery bypass grafting vs percutaneous coronary intervention and long-term mortality and morbidity in multivessel disease: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of the arterial grafting and stenting era.冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对多支血管病变患者长期死亡率和发病率的影响:动脉搭桥和支架时代随机临床试验的荟萃分析。
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Feb 1;174(2):223-30. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.12844.

引用本文的文献

1
Information usefulness of public disclosure in Taiwan: Does it vary across specific diseases/conditions and contexts?台湾公开披露信息的有用性:它在特定疾病/状况和背景下会有所不同吗?
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 28;20(3):e0310340. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310340. eCollection 2025.
2
Referral Networks, Racial Inequity, and Hospital Quality for Open Heart Surgery.转诊网络、种族不平等与心脏直视手术的医院质量
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2025 Jan;18(1):e010778. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.123.010778. Epub 2024 Dec 27.
3
Methodology in coronary artery bypass surgery quality assessment.

本文引用的文献

1
Critical appraisal of nonrandomized studies-A review of recommended and commonly used tools.非随机研究的批判性评价-推荐和常用工具的综述。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2019 Feb;25(1):44-52. doi: 10.1111/jep.12889. Epub 2018 Feb 27.
2
Treatment and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Shock After Public Reporting Policy Changes in New York.纽约公共报告政策变化后急性心肌梗死合并休克患者的治疗及转归
JAMA Cardiol. 2016 Sep 1;1(6):648-54. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.1806.
3
Rates of Invasive Management of Cardiogenic Shock in New York Before and After Exclusion From Public Reporting.
冠状动脉搭桥手术质量评估方法学
J Geriatr Cardiol. 2022 Nov 28;19(11):867-875. doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2022.11.006.
4
The impact of hospital price and quality transparency tools on healthcare spending: a systematic review.医院价格与质量透明度工具对医疗支出的影响:一项系统综述
Health Econ Rev. 2022 Dec 14;12(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s13561-022-00409-4.
5
An Evidence-Based Theory About PRO Use in Kidney Care: A Realist Synthesis.关于PRO在肾脏护理中应用的循证理论:实在论综合分析
Patient. 2022 Jan;15(1):21-38. doi: 10.1007/s40271-021-00530-2. Epub 2021 Jun 10.
6
Mechanisms and impact of public reporting on physicians and hospitals' performance: A systematic review (2000-2020).公众报告对医生和医院绩效的影响机制和影响:系统评价(2000-2020 年)。
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 24;16(2):e0247297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247297. eCollection 2021.
7
Public Reporting of Nurse Staffing in the United States.美国护士人员配置的公开报告。
J Nurs Regul. 2019 Oct;10(3):14-20. doi: 10.1016/S2155-8256(19)30143-7.
8
Public reporting of PCI operator outcomes.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)操作人员治疗结果的公开报告。
Aging (Albany NY). 2019 Dec 17;11(24):11797-11798. doi: 10.18632/aging.102624.
纽约在将心原性休克排除在公共报告之外前后的有创性治疗率。
JAMA Cardiol. 2016 Sep 1;1(6):640-7. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.0785.
4
The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.公开报告对临床结果的影响:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Jul 22;16:296. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1543-y.
5
CABG for Complex CAD: When Will Evidence-Based Practice Align With Evidence-Based Medicine?复杂冠状动脉疾病的冠状动脉旁路移植术:基于证据的实践何时会与循证医学相一致?
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Jan 5;67(1):56-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.11.004.
6
Collaborative quality improvement vs public reporting for percutaneous coronary intervention: A comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention in New York vs Michigan.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的协作质量改进与公开报告:纽约州与密歇根州经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的比较
Am Heart J. 2015 Dec;170(6):1227-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
7
Racism as a Determinant of Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.种族主义作为健康的一个决定因素:系统评价与荟萃分析
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 23;10(9):e0138511. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138511. eCollection 2015.
8
How to read a funnel plot in a meta-analysis.如何解读荟萃分析中的漏斗图。
BMJ. 2015 Sep 16;351:h4718. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h4718.
9
Public reporting in cardiovascular medicine: accountability, unintended consequences, and promise for improvement.心血管医学中的公共报告:问责制、意外后果及改善前景。
Circulation. 2015 Apr 28;131(17):1518-27. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.014118.
10
Association between public reporting of outcomes with procedural management and mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction.急性心肌梗死患者的手术管理结局公开报告与死亡率之间的关联。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Mar 24;65(11):1119-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.01.008.