Practice‐Level Variation in Outpatient Cardiac Care and Association With Outcomes

Background Utilization of cardiac services varies across regions and hospitals, yet little is known regarding variation in the intensity of outpatient cardiac care across cardiology physician practices or the association with clinical endpoints, an area of potential importance to promote efficient care. Methods and Results We included 7 160 732 Medicare beneficiaries who received services from 5635 cardiology practices in 2012. Beneficiaries were assigned to practices providing the plurality of office visits, and practices were ranked and assigned to quartiles using the ratio of observed to predicted annual payments per beneficiary for common cardiac services (outpatient intensity index). The median (interquartile range) outpatient intensity index was 1.00 (0.81–1.24). Mean payments for beneficiaries attributed to practices in the highest (Q4) and lowest (Q1) quartile of outpatient intensity were: all cardiac payments (Q4 $1272 vs Q1 $581; ratio, 2.2); cardiac catheterization (Q4 $215 vs Q1 $64; ratio, 3.4); myocardial perfusion imaging (Q4 $253 vs Q1 $83; ratio, 3.0); and electrophysiology device procedures (Q4 $353 vs Q1 $142; ratio, 2.5). The adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) for 1 incremental quartile of outpatient intensity for each outcome was: cardiac surgical/procedural hospitalization (1.09 [1.09, 1.10]); cardiac medical hospitalization (1.00 [0.99, 1.00]); noncardiac hospitalization (0.99 [0.99, 0.99]); and death at 1 year (1.00 [0.99, 1.00]). Conclusion Substantial variation in the intensity of outpatient care exists at the cardiology practice level, and higher intensity is not associated with reduced mortality or hospitalizations. Outpatient cardiac care is a potentially important target for efforts to improve efficiency in the Medicare population.

[1]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  Association Between Comorbidities and Outcomes in Heart Failure Patients With and Without an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention , 2015, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[2]  G. Fonarow,et al.  Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Use Among Medicare Patients With Low Ejection Fraction After Acute Myocardial Infarction. , 2015, JAMA.

[3]  R. Steinbrook The repeal of Medicare's sustainable growth rate for physician payment. , 2015, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

[4]  P. Douglas,et al.  Physician Decision Making and Trends in the Use of Cardiac Stress Testing in the United States , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[5]  Manesh R. Patel,et al.  Patient selection for diagnostic coronary angiography and hospital-level percutaneous coronary intervention appropriateness: insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[6]  M. Chung,et al.  HRS/ACC/AHA expert consensus statement on the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in patients who are not included or not well represented in clinical trials. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  J. Spertus,et al.  Variation in patients’ perceptions of elective percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease: cross sectional study , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  M. Tavenner,et al.  The Medicare physician-data release--context and rationale. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  P. O'Gara Caution advised: Medicare's physician-payment data release. , 2014, New England Journal of Medicine.

[10]  G. Rose,et al.  Improving appropriate use of echocardiography and single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging: a continuous quality improvement initiative. , 2014, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[11]  H. Jneid,et al.  Frequency and practice-level variation in inappropriate and nonrecommended prasugrel prescribing: insights from the NCDR PINNACLE registry. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  M. Chung,et al.  HRS/ACC/AHA expert consensus statement on the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in patients who are not included or not well represented in clinical trials. , 2014, Heart rhythm.

[13]  M. Chung,et al.  HRS/ACC/AHA expert consensus statement on the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in patients who are not included or not well represented in clinical trials. , 2014, Circulation.

[14]  Manesh R. Patel,et al.  Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. , 2014, American heart journal.

[15]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Hospital variation in the use of noninvasive cardiac imaging and its association with downstream testing, interventions, and outcomes. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[16]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  Variations in coronary artery disease secondary prevention prescriptions among outpatient cardiology practices: insights from the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry). , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  M. Rosenthal,et al.  Choosing wisely--the politics and economics of labeling low-value services. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Samin K. Sharma,et al.  Appropriateness of Diagnostic Catheterization for Suspected Coronary Artery Disease in New York State , 2014, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[19]  R. Hendel,et al.  The use of a learning community and online evaluation of utilization for SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. , 2013, JACC Cardiovascular Imaging.

[20]  J. Newhouse,et al.  Interim Report of the Committee on Geographic Variation in Health Care Spending and Promotion of High-Value Health Care , 2013 .

[21]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Downstream clinical implications of abnormal myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography based on appropriate use criteria , 2013, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology.

[22]  V. Prasad,et al.  Prespecified falsification end points: can they validate true observational associations? , 2013, JAMA.

[23]  T. Carey,et al.  Stress imaging use and repeat revascularization among medicare patients with high-risk coronary artery disease. , 2012, The American journal of cardiology.

[24]  G. Stukenborg,et al.  Prediction of mortality in clinical practice for medicare patients undergoing defibrillator implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  Manesh R. Patel,et al.  Cardiologist concordance with the American College of Cardiology appropriate use criteria for cardiac testing in patients with coronary artery disease. , 2012, The American journal of cardiology.

[26]  Samin K. Sharma,et al.  Appropriateness of coronary revascularization for patients without acute coronary syndromes. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[27]  L. Allen,et al.  Abstract 75: Practice-level Variation in use of Recommended Medications among Outpatients with Heart Failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE Program , 2012 .

[28]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  Prediction of Long-Term Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Older Adults: Results From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry , 2012, Circulation.

[29]  J. Skinner,et al.  Decision-Making Process Reported by Medicare Patients Who Had Coronary Artery Stenting or Surgery for Prostate Cancer , 2012, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[30]  P. Zimetbaum,et al.  Time for a change--a new approach to ICD replacement. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  Y. Schenker,et al.  Patients' and cardiologists' perceptions of the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary disease. , 2011, Annals of internal medicine.

[32]  Sana M. Al-Khatib,et al.  Non-evidence-based ICD implantations in the United States. , 2011, JAMA.

[33]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  Patterns of cardiac stress testing after revascularization in community practice. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[34]  Sanjay Kaul,et al.  Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  D. Wennberg,et al.  Variation in Cardiologists' Propensity to Test and Treat: Is It Associated With Regional Variation in Utilization? , 2010, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[36]  D. Levy,et al.  Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: the Framingham Heart Study. , 1998, Circulation.

[37]  Russell S. Kirby,et al.  The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care , 1998 .

[38]  R. Keller,et al.  The association between local diagnostic testing intensity and invasive cardiac procedures. , 1996, JAMA.

[39]  Brian Steele,et al.  Data Mapping and Data Dictionaries , 2016 .

[40]  R. Hendel,et al.  A selection of recent original research papers , 2013, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology.

[41]  R. Tan,et al.  Correlation between clinical outcomes and appropriateness grading for referral to myocardial perfusion imaging for preoperative evaluation prior to non-cardiac surgery , 2012, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology.

[42]  B. Gersh Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2012 .