You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 158 No. 16, September 14, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Investigation
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (43)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Quality of Care, Other
 •Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Consultation Between Cardiologists and Generalists in the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Implications for Quality of Care

Donald J. Willison, ScD; Stephen B. Soumerai, ScD; Thomas J. McLaughlin, ScD; Jerry H. Gurwitz, MD; Xiaoming Gao, MA; Edward Guadagnoli, PhD; Steven Pearson, MD; Paul Hauptman, MD; Barbara McLaughlin, BAN

Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1778-1783.

Background  The rapid expansion of managed care in the United States has increased debate regarding the appropriate mix of generalist and specialist involvement in medical care.

Objective  To compare the quality of medical care when generalists and cardiologists work separately or together in the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods  We reviewed the charts of 1716 patients with AMI treated at 22 Minnesota hospitals between 1992 and 1993. Patients eligible for thrombolytic aspirin, {beta}-blockers, and lidocaine therapy were identified using criteria from the 1991 American College of Cardiology guidelines for the management of AMI. We compared the use of these drugs among eligible patients whose attending physician was a generalist with no cardiologist input, a generalist with a cardiologist consultation, and a cardiologist alone.

Results  Patients cared for by a cardiologist alone were younger, presented earlier to the hospital, were more likely to be male, had less severe comorbidity, and were more likely to have an ST elevation of 1 mm or more than generalists' patients. Controlling for these differences, there was no variation in the use of effective agents between patients cared for by a cardiologist attending physician and a generalist with a consultation by a cardiologist. However, there was a consistent trend toward increased use of aspirin, thrombolytics, and {beta}-blockers in these patients compared with those with a generalist attending physician only (P<.05 for {beta}-blockers only). Differences between groups in the use of lidocaine were not statistically significant. The adjusted probabilities of use of thrombolytics for consultative care and cardiologist attending physicians were 0.73 for both. Corresponding probabilities were 0.86 and 0.85 for aspirin and 0.59 and 0.57 for {beta}-blockers, respectively.

Conclusions  For patients with AMI, consultation between generalists and specialists may improve the quality of care. Recent policy debates that have focused solely on access to specialists have ignored the important issue of coordination of care between generalist and specialist physicians. In hospitals where cardiology services are available, generalists may be caring for patients with AMI who are older and more frail. Future research and policy analyses should examine whether this pattern of selective referral is true for other medical conditions.


From the Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Boston, Mass (Drs Willison, Soumerai, McLaughlin, and Pearson and Ms Gao); Centre for the Evaluation of Medicines, St Joseph's Hospital and McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario (Dr Willison); the Meyers Primary Care Institute, University of Massachusetts Medical Center and the Fallon Healthcare System, Worcester (Dr Gurwitz); the Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School (Dr Guadagnoli); Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston (Dr Hauptman); and Healthcare Education and Research Foundation, St Paul, Minn (Ms McLaughlin).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

The Paradox of Primary Care
Stange and Ferrer
Ann Fam Med 2009;7:293-299.
FULL TEXT  

A Typology of Specialists' Clinical Roles
Forrest
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1062-1068.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Audit of the consultation process on general internal medicine services
Conley et al.
Qual Saf Health Care 2009;18:59-62.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Opportunity Missed: Medical Consultation, Resource Use, and Quality of Care of Patients Undergoing Major Surgery
Auerbach et al.
Arch Intern Med 2007;167:2338-2344.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Influence of Inpatient Service Specialty on Care Processes and Outcomes for Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes
Roe et al.
Circulation 2007;116:1153-1161.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Health Care Becomes an Industry
Rastegar
Ann Fam Med 2004;2:79-83.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

An Australian comparison of specialist care of acute myocardial infarction
SCOTT et al.
Int J Qual Health Care 2003;15:155-161.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Chronic Illness Management: What Is the Role of Primary Care?
Rothman and Wagner
ANN INTERN MED 2003;138:256-261.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Hospitalization from Hell: A Patient's Perspective on Quality
Cleary
ANN INTERN MED 2003;138:33-39.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Specialty of Ambulatory Care Physicians and Mortality among Elderly Patients after Myocardial Infarction
Ayanian et al.
NEJM 2002;347:1678-1686.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Are Bad Outcomes from Questionable Clinical Decisions Preventable Medical Errors? A Case of Cascade Iatrogenesis
Hofer and Hayward
ANN INTERN MED 2002;137:327-333.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Use of the Statins in Patients After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Does Evidence Change Practice?
Jackevicius et al.
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:183-188.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Patient characteristics associated with care by a cardiologist among adults hospitalized with severe congestive heart failure
Auerbach et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:2119-2125.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Resource Use and Survival of Patients Hospitalized with Congestive Heart Failure: Differences in Care by Specialty of the Attending Physician
Auerbach et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2000;132:191-200.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Timeliness and Quality of Care for Elderly Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Under Health Maintenance Organization vs Fee-for-Service Insurance
Soumerai et al.
Arch Intern Med 1999;159:2013-2020.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Optimizing Care for Persons with HIV Infection
Hecht et al.
ANN INTERN MED 1999;131:136-143.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Is Cardiologist-Coordinated Care Better Than Generalist Care After MI?
Journal Watch Cardiology 1998;1998:8-8.
FULL TEXT  

Effect of Local Medical Opinion Leaders on Quality of Care for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Soumerai et al.
JAMA 1998;279:1358-1363.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.