Quality of ambulatory care after myocardial infarction among medicare patients by type of insurance and region

Citation
Me. Seddon et al., Quality of ambulatory care after myocardial infarction among medicare patients by type of insurance and region, AM J MED, 111(1), 2001, pp. 24-32
Citations number
37
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine","Medical Research General Topics
Journal title
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
ISSN journal
00029343 → ACNP
Volume
111
Issue
1
Year of publication
2001
Pages
24 - 32
Database
ISI
SICI code
0002-9343(200107)111:1<24:QOACAM>2.0.ZU;2-3
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate use of effective cardiac medications and rehabilitatio n after myocardial infarction in the ambulatory setting in health maintenan ce organizations (HMOs) and fee-for-service care, and by region. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We surveyed elderly Medicare patients during 1996 and 1997 in California (n = 516), Florida (n = 304), and the Northeast Ln = 22 0; Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania) approximately 18 months after myocardial infarction. We assessed use of cardiac medications and rehabili tation for HMO (n = 520) and fee-for-service (n = 520) patients matched by age, sex, month of infarct, and region. RESULTS: Across all regions, similar proportions of HMO and fee-for-service patients were using aspirin (72%, n = 374 vs. 74%, n = 387), beta-blockers (38%, n = 195 vs. 32%, n = 168), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (31%, n 159 vs. 29%, n 148), cholesterol-lowering agents (28%, n 146 vs. 30 %,n 157), and calcium channel blockers (31%, n 162vs. 31 %, n 159; all P >0 .07), except in California where more HMO patients received beta-blockers ( 36%, n = 93 vs. 26%, n = 66, P = 0.01). In adjusted analyses, use of these drugs did not differ significantly between HMO and fee-for-service patients . Substantial regional differences were evident in the use of beta-blockers (Northeast 46%, n = 102; Florida 34%, n = 102; California 31%, n = 159) an d cholesterol-lowering agents (California 35%, n = 182; Florida 24%, n = 73 ; Northeast 22%, n = 48; each P <0.001). Fee-for-service patients were more likely than HMO patients to receive cardiac rehabilitation in unadjusted ( 32%, n = 167, vs. 22%, n = 141, P = 0.001) and adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Both HMO and fee-for-service patients would likely benefit fro m greater use of beta-blockers and cholesterol-lowering agents. Professiona l fees for cardiac rehabilitation may promote increased use among fee-for-s ervice patients. Future studies should assess the quality of ambulatory car diac care in different types of HMOs and the reasons for geographic variati ons in cardiac drug use. AmJMed.2001;111: 24-32. (C) 2001 by Excerpta Medic a, Inc.