首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Clinical Cardiology >Intensity of antianginal therapy in patients referred for coronary angiography: A comparison of fee‐for‐service and health maintenance organization therapeutic strategies
【2h】

Intensity of antianginal therapy in patients referred for coronary angiography: A comparison of fee‐for‐service and health maintenance organization therapeutic strategies

机译:接受冠状动脉造影的患者抗心绞痛治疗的强度:收费服务和健康维持组织治疗策略的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: No formal criteria have been developed to guide medical therapy for angina prior to revascularization, and no comparisons have been made between health maintenance organization (HMO) and fee‐for‐service (FFS) hospitals with respect to angina treatment. Hypothesis: Using a literature‐based measure of medical intensity, we tested the hypothesis that there is no difference in anginal medical therapeutic intensity between HMO and FFS systems. Methods: For each antianginal drug, we developed a model from which an intensity score between 0 and 100 could be calculated. Average and maximal daily doses of drug were fit to a sigmoid curve such that they represented scores of 50 and 99, respectively. Overall intensity scores were obtained by weighted and unweighted averaging of three scores from nitrates, calcium‐channel blockers, and beta blockers. This model was applied to 199 patients undergoing angiography at an FFS and an HMO hospital. Results: HMO patients were taking more classes of antianginal drug (1.9 vs. 1.0, p < 0.001). Overall unweighted (17.7 vs. 11.7, p = 0.02) and weighted (27.3 vs. 16.9, p = 0.003) intensity scores for both HMO and FFS patients were low. HMO intensity scores for the use of beta blockers were greater than FFS scores (19.2 vs. 9.6, p = 0.002). The intensity scores for the use of nitrates and calcium blockers were similar. Conclusions: Models for the measurement of anginal medical therapy intensity can provide important information regarding medical therapy prior to revascularization. The overall intensity of medical therapy was low in both health care systems. These findings have important implications for patient management, guideline development, and national healthcare policy.
机译:背景:尚未制定正式标准来指导血运重建之前的心绞痛的药物治疗,健康维持组织(HMO)和收费服务(FFS)医院之间在心绞痛治疗方面未进行比较。假设:使用基于文献的医学强度测量方法,我们检验了以下假设:HMO和FFS系统之间的心绞痛医疗强度没有差异。方法:对于每种抗心绞痛药物,我们开发了一个模型,可以从该模型计算强度得分在0到100之间。将药物的平均和最大日剂量拟合为S形曲线,以使其分别代表50分和99分。总强度得分是通过硝酸盐,钙通道阻滞剂和β阻滞剂的三个评分的加权和未加权平均得出的。该模型应用于在FFS和HMO医院接受血管造影的199名患者。结果:HMO患者正在服用更多种类的抗心绞痛药物(1.9比1.0,p <0.001)。 HMO和FFS患者的总体未加权(17.7 vs. 11.7,p = 0.02)和加权(27.3 vs. 16.9,p = 0.003)强度得分均较低。使用β受体阻滞剂的HMO强度评分高于FFS评分(19.2与9.6,p = 0.002)。使用硝酸盐和钙阻滞剂的强度得分相似。结论:心绞痛药物治疗强度的测量模型可提供有关血运重建之前药物治疗的重要信息。在两个卫生保健系统中,药物治疗的总体强度均较低。这些发现对患者管理,指南制定和国家医疗保健政策具有重要意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号