Beta-adrenergic blockers for perioperative cardiac risk reduction in people undergoing vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: People undergoing major vascular surgery have an increased risk of postoperative cardiac complications. Beta-adrenergic blockers represent an important and established pharmacological intervention in the prevention of cardiac complications in people with coronary artery disease. It has been proposed that this class of drugs may reduce the risk of perioperative cardiac complications in people undergoing major non-cardiac vascular surgery. OBJECTIVES: To review the efficacy and safety of perioperative beta-adrenergic blockade in reducing cardiac or all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and other cardiovascular safety outcomes in people undergoing major non-cardiac vascular surgery. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (January 2014) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2013, Issue 12). We searched trials databases and checked reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective, randomised controlled trials of perioperative beta-adrenergic blockade of people over 18 years of age undergoing non-cardiac vascular surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. We resolved disagreements through discussion. We performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies in this review, both of which were double-blind, randomised controlled trials comparing perioperative beta-adrenergic blockade (metoprolol) with placebo, on cardiovascular outcomes in people undergoing major non-cardiac vascular surgery. We included 599 participants receiving beta-adrenergic blockers (301 participants) or placebo (298 participants). The overall quality of studies was good. However, one study did not report random sequence generation or allocation concealment techniques, indicating possible selection bias, and the other study did not report outcome assessor blinding and was possibly underpowered. It should be noted that several of the outcomes were only reported in a single study and neither of the studies reported on vascular patency/graft occlusion, which reduces the quality of evidence to moderate. There was no evidence that perioperative beta-adrenergic blockade reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.03 to 15.02), cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.32), non-fatal myocardial infarction (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.49; P value = 0.53), arrhythmia (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.88), heart failure (OR 1.71, 95% CI 0.40 to 7.23), stroke (OR 2.67, 95% CI 0.11 to 67.08), composite cardiovascular events (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.39; P value = 0.57) or re-hospitalisation at 30 days (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.52). However, there was strong evidence that beta-adrenergic blockers increased the odds of intra-operative bradycardia (OR 4.97, 95% CI 3.22 to 7.65; P value < 0.00001) and intra-operative hypotension (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.59; P value = 0.0005). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis currently offers no clear evidence that perioperative beta-adrenergic blockade reduces postoperative cardiac morbidity and mortality in people undergoing major non-cardiac vascular surgery. There is evidence that intra-operative bradycardia and hypotension are more likely in people taking perioperative beta-adrenergic blockers, which should be weighed with any benefit.

Using Lean Performance Improvement for Patient-Centered Medical Home Transformation at an Academic Public Hospital.

Although Lean performance improvement (PI) has been used in health care for more than 15 years, little is known about how Lean has been used in Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) transformation. We describe our experience implementing Lean in our safety-net, primary care teaching clinic. To advance high value care, a culture of systematic, sustainable PI methods needed to be integrated into primary care and taught to resident physicians. Clinic leadership were trained in Lean methods, protected time was dedicated to PI for a stable, interdisciplinary team, then visual management was introduced, and resident physicians were integrated into the clinic's PI initiatives. Self-assessment using the PCMH Assessment tool demonstrated improvement in core features of the PCMH model. Process outcomes also revealed successful, sustainable integration of Lean into our primary care clinic and resident training, and early findings show improvements in clinical quality outcomes. Patient survey outcomes demonstrate improvement in patient experience. Lean can be used successfully to promote PCMH transformation and create a culture of continuous PI in an academic, safety-net primary care setting.

Impact of hospital variables on case mix index as a marker of disease severity.

Case mix index (CMI) has become a standard indicator of hospital disease severity in the United States and internationally. However, CMI was designed to calculate hospital payments, not to track disease severity, and is highly dependent on documentation and coding accuracy. The authors evaluated whether CMI varied by characteristics affecting hospitals' disease severity (eg, trauma center or not). The authors also evaluated whether CMI was lower at public hospitals than private hospitals, given the diminished financial resources to support documentation enhancement at public hospitals. CMI data for a 14-year period from a large public database were analyzed longitudinally and cross-sectionally to define the impact of hospital variables on average CMI within and across hospital groups. Between 1996 and 2007, average CMI declined by 0.4% for public hospitals, while rising significantly for private for-profit (14%) and nonprofit (6%) hospitals. After the introduction of the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG) system in 2007, average CMI increased for all 3 hospital types but remained lowest in public vs. private for-profit or nonprofit hospitals (1.05 vs. 1.25 vs. 1.20; P<0.0001). By multivariate analysis, teaching hospitals, level 1 trauma centers, and larger hospitals had higher average CMI, consistent with a marker of disease severity, but only for private hospitals. Public hospitals had lower CMI across all subgroups. Although CMI had some characteristics of a disease severity marker, it was lower across all strata for public hospitals. Hence, caution is warranted when using CMI to adjust for disease severity across public vs. private hospitals.

Improving transitions of care for patients with thromboembolic disease.

Patients with or at risk for thromboembolic disease have many transitional interactions within the healthcare system. Transitions of care--when patients move between or within sites of care, or transition from inpatient to outpatient status--create repeated and diverse opportunities for medication errors, rehospitalization, and other adverse events that may increase costs. Although effective antithrombotic therapies are available, these therapies are complex, underprescribed, and frequently suboptimally managed, a situation further exacerbated by poor patient adherence to therapy. Physician and patient education may help address knowledge gaps related to antithrombotic therapy to help ensure that patients receive appropriate therapy and adhere to the therapeutic regimen. Due to the complexities of antithrombotic therapy it is not surprising that when these patients experience transitions of care, the potential for errors and suboptimal outcomes becomes compounded. Efforts are under way to improve the process of transitional care, including the development of protocols for medication reconciliation, improved communication between clinicians at hand-off, the use of electronic medical records, and the introduction of a collaborative approach among different types of healthcare providers, including pharmacists, nurses, and care managers, so that transitional care is provided smoothly and safely.

Capturing the diagnosis: an internal medicine education program to improve documentation.

BACKGROUND: Specific and accurate documentation of patient diagnoses and comorbidities in the medical record is critical to drive quality improvement and to ensure accuracy of publicly reported data. Unfortunately, inpatient documentation is taught to internal medicine trainees and practitioners sporadically, if at all. At Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, a public, tertiary care, academic medical center, we implemented an educational program to enhance documentation of diagnoses and comorbidities by internal medicine resident and attending physicians. METHODS: The program consisted of a series of lectures and the creation of a pocket card. These were designed to guide providers in accurate documentation of common diagnoses that group to different levels of disease severity, achieved by capturing Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services complication codes and major complication codes. We started the educational program in January 2010 and used a pre-post design to compare outcomes. The program's impact on complication codes and major complication codes capture rates, mortality index, and case mix index was evaluated using the University Health Consortium database. RESULTS: The median quarterly complication codes and major complication codes capture rate for inpatients on the internal medicine service was 42% before the intervention versus 48% after (P = .003). Observed mortality did not change but expected mortality increased, resulting in a 30% decline in median quarterly mortality index (P = .001). The median quarterly case mix index increased from 1.27 to 1.36 (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Thus, implementation of an internal medicine documentation curriculum improved accuracy in documenting diagnoses and comorbidities, resulting in improved capture of complication codes.

A controlled investigation of optimal internal medicine ward team structure at a teaching hospital.

BACKGROUND: The optimal structure of an internal medicine ward team at a teaching hospital is unknown. We hypothesized that increasing the ratio of attendings to housestaff would result in an enhanced perceived educational experience for residents. METHODS: Harbor-UCLA Medical Center (HUMC) is a tertiary care, public hospital in Los Angeles County. Standard ward teams at HUMC, with a housestaff∶attending ratio of 5:1, were split by adding one attending and then dividing the teams into two experimental teams containing ratios of 3:1 and 2:1. Web-based Likert satisfaction surveys were completed by housestaff and attending physicians on the experimental and control teams at the end of their rotations, and objective healthcare outcomes (e.g., length of stay, hospital readmission, mortality) were compared. RESULTS: Nine hundred and ninety patients were admitted to the standard control teams and 184 were admitted to the experimental teams (81 to the one-intern team and 103 to the two-intern team). Patients admitted to the experimental and control teams had similar age and disease severity. Residents and attending physicians consistently indicated that the quality of the educational experience, time spent teaching, time devoted to patient care, and quality of life were superior on the experimental teams. Objective healthcare outcomes did not differ between experimental and control teams. CONCLUSIONS: Altering internal medicine ward team structure to reduce the ratio of housestaff to attending physicians improved the perceived educational experience without altering objective healthcare outcomes.

Choosing the right heparin prophylaxis strategy in medical patients at risk for developing VTE: an evidence-based approach.

Many acutely ill medical patients are at significant risk for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) during hospitalization. Venous thromboembolism risk arises from both the presenting clinical condition as well as predisposing risk factors, such as advanced age. Thromboprophylaxis is underprescribed in these patients. Thrombotic risk assessment could encourage the prescribing of thromboprophylaxis and, therefore, improve patient protection against VTE. Current guidelines from the American College of Chest Physicians and the International Union of Angiology (IUA) recommend thromboprophylaxis with low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH), a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), or fondaparinux for acutely ill medical patients with VTE risk factors. However, the optimal dose regimen for UFH is unclear. The 2006 evidence-based guidelines from the IUA recommend a 3-times-daily dose regimen for UFH. However, UFH is usually administered twice daily despite a lack of evidence for the superiority of this regimen. Both heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and bleeding are associated with UFH, and to a lesser degree with alternative anticoagulants, such as the LMWHs. If utilized, an appropriate prophylaxis regimen in medical patients can reduce the risk of VTE and its burden.

Peripheral vascular surgery using targeted beta blockade reduces perioperative cardiac event rate.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that preoperative cardiac stress testing is unnecessary in low to intermediate cardiac risk patients undergoing operations, and that targeted beta blockade is cardiac protective. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study of patients undergoing vascular surgery or major amputation, with low to intermediate cardiac risk, but without cardiac stress testing, was performed. Targeted beta blockade was initiated preoperatively. The primary end point was a composite of adverse cardiac outcomes. A comparison was made with historical controls who received selective stress testing and selective nontargeted beta blockade. RESULTS: One hundred consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled, and 80 retrospective controls were identified. There were no differences between groups with respect to median revised cardiac index (RCI; 0 versus 1). In the retrospective group, 14% underwent preoperative cardiac stress testing versus none in the prospective group (p=0.0002). Nontargeted beta blockade was given in 61% of the retrospective group. The median heart rate for the prospective group was significantly lower (66 versus 77 beats/minute; p=0.0007). The composite cardiac complication rate was 2% in the prospective group versus 10% in the retrospective group (p=0.02). There were no deaths. On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for revised cardiac index score, there was a lower cardiac complication rate in the prospective group (odds ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.5; p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing vascular surgery or major amputation, with low to intermediate cardiac risk, preoperative targeted beta blockade alone is more effective than selective cardiac stress testing and nontargeted beta blockade in preventing cardiac morbidity.