Article

Management of Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease (Compilation of 2005 and 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline Recommendations) : A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Impact Factor: 15.34). 02/2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.004
Source: PubMed
0 Followers
 · 
153 Views
  • Circulation Research 04/2015; 116(9):1505-8. DOI:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306403 · 11.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Peripheral artery disease (PAD), secondary to atherosclerotic disease, is currently the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the western world. While PAD is common, it is estimated that the majority of patients with PAD are undiagnosed and undertreated. The challenge to the treatment of PAD is to accurately diagnose the symptoms and determine treatment for each patient. The varied presentations of peripheral vascular disease have led to numerous classification schemes throughout the literature. Consistent grading of patients leads to both objective criteria for treating patients and a baseline for clinical follow-up. Reproducible classification systems are also important in clinical trials and when comparing medical, surgical, and endovascular treatment paradigms. This article reviews the various classification systems for PAD and advantages to each system.
    Seminars in Interventional Radiology 12/2014; 31(4):378-388. DOI:10.1055/s-0034-1393976
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) seek to reduce growth in healthcare spending while ensuring high-quality care. We hypothesized that accountable care organization implementation would selectively limit the use of discretionary cardiovascular care (defined as care occurring in the absence of indications such as myocardial infarction or stroke), while maintaining high-quality care, such as nondiscretionary cardiovascular imaging and procedures. The intervention group was composed of fee-for-service Medicare patients (n=819 779) from 10 groups participating in a Medicare pilot accountable care organization, the Physician Group Practice Demonstration (PGPD). Matched controls were patients (n=934 621) from nonparticipating groups in the same regions. We compared use of cardiovascular care before (2002-2004) and after (2005-2009) PGPD implementation, studying both discretionary and nondiscretionary carotid and coronary imaging and procedures. Our main outcome measure was the difference in the proportion of patients treated with imaging and procedures among patients of PGPD practices compared with patients in control practices, before and after PGPD implementation (difference-in-difference). For discretionary imaging, the difference-in-difference between PGPD practices and controls was not statistically significant for discretionary carotid imaging (0.17%; 95% confidence interval, -0.51% to 0.85%; P=0.595) or discretionary coronary imaging (-0.19%; 95% confidence interval, -0.73% to 0.35%; P=0.468). Similarly, the difference-in-difference was also minimal for discretionary carotid revascularization (0.003%; 95% confidence interval, -0.008% to 0.002%; P=0.705) and coronary revascularization (-0.02%; 95% confidence interval, -0.11% to 0.07%; P=0.06). The difference-in-difference associated with PGPD implementation was also essentially 0 for nondiscretionary cardiovascular imaging or procedures. Implementation of a pilot accountable care organization did not limit the use of discretionary or nondiscretionary cardiovascular care in 10 large health systems. © 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.
    Circulation 11/2014; 130(22):1954-61. DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.011470 · 14.95 Impact Factor