Impact of clinical urgency, physician supply and procedural capacity on regional variations in wait times for coronary angiography

BackgroundDespite universal health care, there continues to be regional access disparities to coronary angiography in Canada. Our objective was to evaluate the extent to which demand-side factors such as clinical urgency/need, and supply-side factors, as reflected by differences in physician and procedural supply account for these inequalities.MethodsOur cohort consisted of 74,254 consecutive patients referred for coronary angiography in Ontario, Canada between April 1st 2005 and March 31st 2006, divided into three urgency strata based on a clinical urgency scale. Cox-proportional hazard models were developed, adjusting for age, gender, socioeconomic status (SES), region, and urgency score, with greater hazard ratios (HR) indicating shorter wait times. To evaluate mediators of any residual wait-time differences, we examined the influence of the regional supply of cath lab facilities, invasive cardiologists and general practitioners (GP).ResultsWe found that the urgency score was a significant predictor of wait time in all three strata (urgent patients: HR 1.61 for each unit increase in patient urgency (95% Confidence interval (CI) 1.55-1.67); semi-urgent patients: HR 1.55 (95% CI 1.44-1.68); elective patients: HR 1.13 (95% CI 1.08-1.18)). After accounting for clinical need/urgency, regional wait time differences persisted; these were most consistently associated with variation in cath lab supply. The impact of invasive cardiologist supply was restricted to urgent patients while that of GP supply was confined to semi-urgent and elective patients.ConclusionWe found that there remained significant regional disparities in access to coronary angiography after accounting for clinical need. These disparities are partially explained by variations in supply of both procedural capacity and physician services, most notably in elective and semi-urgent patients.

[1]  Joseph P Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2006, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[2]  P. Austin,et al.  Waiting times, revascularization modality, and outcomes after acute myocardial infarction at hospitals with and without on-site revascularization facilities in Canada. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  P. Austin,et al.  Utilisation of coronary angiography after acute myocardial infarction in Ontario over time: have referral patterns changed? , 2002, Heart.

[4]  R. Walld,et al.  Regional variation in angiography, coronary artery bypass surgery, and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in Manitoba, 1987 to 1992: the funnel effect. , 1998, Medical care.

[5]  P. Austin,et al.  Effects of socioeconomic status on access to invasive cardiac procedures and on mortality after acute myocardial infarction. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  C. Naylor,et al.  Queueing for coronary surgery during severe supply-demand mismatch in a Canadian referral centre: a case study of implicit rationing. , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[7]  P. Austin,et al.  Geography and service supply do not explain socioeconomic gradients in angiography use after acute myocardial infarction. , 2003, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[8]  M. Young,et al.  Health services research , 2008, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  J. Tu,et al.  The evaluation of a formalized queue management system for coronary angiography waiting lists. , 2005, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[10]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Risk-treatment mismatch in the pharmacotherapy of heart failure. , 2005, JAMA.

[11]  M. Mamdani,et al.  Lipid-lowering therapy with statins in high-risk elderly patients: the treatment-risk paradox. , 2004, JAMA.

[12]  Lipid-lowering therapy with statins in high-risk elderly patients: the treatment-risk paradox. , 2004 .

[13]  Naylor Cd,et al.  Rating the urgency of coronary angiography: results of an expert panel process. Ontario Coronary Angiography Panel. , 1993 .

[14]  M Thorogood,et al.  The Cardiac Waiting Game: Are Patients Prioritized on the Basis of Clinical Need? , 1997, Health services management research.

[15]  Jack V Tu,et al.  Measuring and reducing waiting times: a cross-national comparison of strategies. , 2007, Health affairs.

[16]  Jeffrey L. Anderson,et al.  2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice guidelines. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.