This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert H. Brook, MD, ScD; Paul Shekelle, MD, PhD
Santa Monica, Calif

Arch Intern Med. 1996;156(5):584-587.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

We congratulate Noonan et al¹ for studying the appropriateness of coronary angiography at the Harvard Community Health Plan (HCHP) and for finding the proportion of coronary angiography procedures judged appropriate to be so high. We believe, just as Noonan and colleagues do, that increasing our knowledge about the validity of the appropriateness method is important.² We note the strong but imperfect relationship between appropriateness ratings and coronary anatomy on angiography, and we did not expect, based on both the scientific literature and the clinical purpose of coronary angiography, to find a stronger relationship. In most cases, the appropriateness of coronary angiography is related to both the likelihood of anatomic disease and the utility of coronary revascularization should the expected anatomy be found. Thus, if a patient is unlikely to have life-threatening coronary artery anatomy, based on history, physical examination, and treadmill results, and has not had an optimal . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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