The impact of statistical adjustment on economic profiles of interventional cardiologists.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify preprocedure patient factors associated with percutaneous intervention costs and to examine the impact of these patient factors on economic profiles of interventional cardiologists. BACKGROUND: There is increasing demand for information about comparative resource use patterns of interventional cardiologists. Economic provider profiles, however, often fail to account for patient characteristics. METHODS: Data were obtained from Duke Medical Center cost and clinical information systems for 1,949 procedures performed by 13 providers between July 1, 1997, and December 31, 1998. Patient factors that influenced cost were identified using multiple regression analysis. After assessing interprovider variation in unadjusted cost, mixed linear models were used to examine how much cost variability was associated with the provider when patient characteristics were taken into account. RESULTS: Total hospital costs averaged $15,643 (median, $13,809), $6,515 of which represented catheterization laboratory costs. Disease severity, acuity, comorbid illness and lesion type influenced total costs (R(2) = 38%), whereas catheterization costs were affected by lesion type and acuity (R(2) = 32%). Patient characteristics varied significantly among providers. Unadjusted total costs were weakly associated with provider, and this association disappeared after accounting for patient factors. The provider influence on catheterization costs persisted after adjusting for patient characteristics. Furthermore, the pattern of variation changed: the adjusted analysis identified three new outliers, and two providers lost their outlier status. Only one provider was consistently identified as an outlier in the unadjusted and adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Economic profiles of interventional cardiologists may be misleading if they do not adequately adjust for patient characteristics before procedure.

Invalidation of the resting electrocardiogram obtained via exercise electrode sites as a standard 12-lead recording.

The difficulty in interpreting the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) due to the interference from muscle potentials produced by arm and leg motion makes it unsuitable during the exercise treadmill test. Likewise, the exercise lead placement ECG cannot substitute for the standard ECG due to significant errors in the former's diagnostic interpretation. This study compares the ECGs recorded via standard and exercise sites regarding frontal and horizontal plane axes, diagnosis and location of myocardial infarction and estimation of infarct size using the complete 54-criteria and 32-point Selvester QRS scoring system. The altered limb lead locations on the exercise ECG caused the QRS vectors to artifactually appear to be directed more inferiorly, posteriorly and rightward, producing a marked rightward mean frontal plane axis shift of +48 degrees (p less than 0.00001). No false positive or false negative anterior infarct was seen on the exercise lead placement ECG, whereas inferior and posterior infarcts were lost in 69% and 31% of patients, respectively. A false lateral infarct was seen in 19% of patients. Estimation of infarct size differed between the 2 ECG sets, with 11 patients increasing their infarct size by 3 to 9% and 14 others decreasing it by 3 to 15% on the exercise lead placement ECG. This study demonstrates that use of body torso positions for limb leads results in substantial QRS waveform variations that disqualify the exercise lead placement ECG as a "standard" recording. Such ECGs should therefore be labeled as "torso positioned" or "nonstandard" to prevent misuse for clinical and investigative purposes.