Matthew B Stanbrook

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Are you Matthew B Stanbrook?

Claim your profile

Publications (116)899.15 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Previous research has shown variations in quality of care and patient outcomes under different primary care models. The objective of this study was to use previously validated, evidence-based performance indicators to measure quality of asthma care over time and to compare quality of care between different primary care models. Methods: Data were obtained for years 2006 to 2010 from the Ontario Asthma Surveillance Information System, which uses health administrative databases to track individuals with asthma living in the province of Ontario, Canada. Individuals with asthma (n=1,813,922) were divided into groups based on the practice model of their primary care provider (i.e., fee-for-service, blended fee-for-service, blended capitation). Quality of asthma care was measured using six validated, evidence-based asthma care performance indicators. Results: All of the asthma performance indicators improved over time within each of the primary care models. Compared to the traditional fee-for-service model, the blended fee-for-service and blended capitation models had higher use of spirometry for asthma diagnosis and monitoring, higher rates of inhaled corticosteroid prescription, and lower outpatient claims. Emergency department visits were lowest in the blended fee-for-service group. Conclusions: Quality of asthma care improved over time within each of the primary care models. However, the amount by which they improved differed between the models. The newer primary care models (i.e., blended fee-for-service, blended capitation) appear to provide better quality of asthma care compared to the traditional fee-for-service model.
    BMC Family Practice 02/2015; 16. DOI:10.1186/s12875-015-0232-y · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • Andrea S Gershon, Michael A Campitelli, Matthew B Stanbrook
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 01/2015; 313(3):305-6. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.16479 · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • Lisa Richardson, Matthew B Stanbrook
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 01/2015; 187(3). DOI:10.1503/cmaj.141613 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a manageable respiratory condition, is the third leading cause of death worldwide. Knowing which prescription medications are the most effective in improving health outcomes for people with COPD is essential to maximizing health outcomes.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 09/2014; 312(11):1114-1121. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.11432 · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook
    Annals of internal medicine 08/2014; 161(4):JC8. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-161-4-201408190-02008 · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Thoracentesis is performed to identify the cause of a pleural effusion. Although generally safe, thoracentesis may be complicated by transient hypoxemia, bleeding, patient discomfort, reexpansion pulmonary edema, and pneumothorax.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 06/2014; 311(23):2422-31. DOI:10.1001/jama.2014.5552 · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook, Michael Campitelli, Andrea Gershon
    JAMA Internal Medicine 04/2014; 174(4):648. DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.12684 · 13.25 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook
    Annals of internal medicine 10/2013; 159(8):JC10. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-159-8-201310150-02010 · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Kirsten Patrick, Matthew Stanbrook, Ken Flegel
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 09/2013; 185(15). DOI:10.1503/cmaj.131359 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and deadly disease. Long-acting inhaled β-agonists and anticholinergics, first-line medications for COPD, have been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes. When choosing between the medications, patients and physicians would benefit from knowing which has the least risk. OBJECTIVE To assess the association of these classes of medications with the risk of hospitalizations and emergency department visits for cardiovascular events. DESIGN We conducted a nested case-control analysis of a retrospective cohort study. We compared the risk of events between patients newly prescribed inhaled long-acting β-agonists and anticholinergics, after matching and adjusting for prognostic factors. SETTING Health care databases from Ontario, the largest province of Canada, with a multicultural population of approximately 13 million. PARTICIPANTS All individuals 66 years or older meeting a validated case definition of COPD, based on health administrative data, and treated for COPD from September 1, 2003, through March 31, 2009. EXPOSURE New use of an inhaled long-acting β-agonist or long-acting anticholinergic. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES An emergency department visit or a hospitalization for a cardiovascular event. RESULTS Of 191 005 eligible patients, 53 532 (28.0%) had a hospitalization or an emergency department visit for a cardiovascular event. Newly prescribed long-acting inhaled β-agonists and anticholinergics were associated with a higher risk of an event compared with nonuse of those medications (respective adjusted odds ratios, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.12-1.52; P < .001] and 1.14 [1.01-1.28; P = .03]). We found no significant difference in events between the 2 medications (adjusted odds ratio of long-acting inhaled β-agonists compared with anticholinergics, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.95-1.38; P = .16]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among older individuals with COPD, new use of long-acting β-agonists and anticholinergics is associated with similar increased risks of cardiovascular events. Close monitoring of COPD patients requiring long-acting bronchodilators is needed regardless of drug class.
    JAMA Internal Medicine 05/2013; DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1016 · 13.25 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: QUESTION Is biomarker- or symptom-based adjustment of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose better than physician assessment-based adjustment for preventing treatment failure in adults with mild to moderate asthma? METHODS DESIGN Randomized, placebo-controlled, 3-group trial (Best Adjustment Strategy for Asthma in the Long Term [BASALT] trial). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00495157. ALLOCATION Unclear allocation concealment.* BLINDING Blinded* (patients). FOLLOW-UP PERIOD 36 weeks. SETTING 10 academic medical centers in the USA. PATIENTS 342 adults (mean age 35 y, 69% women) who had physician-diagnosed, mild to moderate, persistent asthma that was well- or partially controlled with low-dose ICSs; reversible airflow limitation or airway hyperresponsiveness; and ≥ 75% treatment adherence between enrollment and randomization. INTERVENTIONS Beclomethasone HFA inhaler, twice daily, with dose adjusted every 6 weeks based on exhaled nitric oxide levels, plus 2 placebo inhalers (1 used twice daily and 1 as needed) (biomarker group, n = 115); beclomethasone inhaler used only when rescue albuterol was used, plus 2 placebo inhalers used twice daily (symptom group, n = 113); or beclomethasone inhaler, twice daily, with dose adjusted every 6 weeks based on guideline-informed physician assessment, plus 2 placebo inhalers (1 used twice daily and 1 as needed) (physician group, n = 114). All groups used an albuterol inhaler as needed for asthma symptoms. OUTCOMES Primary outcome was first treatment failure (clinically important worsening of asthma). Other outcomes included exacerbations. The study was powered to detect a 60% reduction in treatment failure rate from 30% in the physician assessment-based adjustment group (87% power, 2-sided α = 0.025 for each of 2 main comparisons: biomarker or symptom group vs physician group). PATIENT FOLLOW-UP 85% (intention-to-treat analysis). MAIN RESULTS Biomarker and symptom groups did not differ from the physician group for treatment failure (Table) or asthma exacerbations (biomarker vs physician groups, 0.21 vs 0.23 events per person-y, P = 0.89; symptom vs physician groups, 0.12 vs 0.23 events per person-y, P = 0.11). CONCLUSION In adults with mild to moderate asthma, biomarker- or symptom-based adjustment of inhaled corticosteroid dose did not reduce treatment failure compared with physician assessment-based adjustment.Adjustment of ICS dose based on a biomarker (BBA) or symptoms (SBA) vs physician assessment (PABA) in adults with mild to moderate asthma†OutcomeBBASBAPABAAt 36 wkRRR (97.5% CI)NNT (CI)Treatment failure18%-21%13% (-57 to 52)Not significant-14%21%33% (-28 to 65)Not significant†ICS = inhaled corticosteroid; other abbreviations defined in Glossary. Event rates, RRR, and CI calculated from number of events and randomized patients reported in article.
    Annals of internal medicine 01/2013; 158(2):JC6. DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-158-2-201301150-02006 · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Administrative healthcare databases are used for health services research, comparative effectiveness studies, and measuring quality of care. Adjustment for comorbid illnesses is essential to such studies. Validation of methods to account for comorbid illnesses in administrative data for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been limited. Our objective was to compare the ability of the Charlson index, the Elixhauser method, and the Johns Hopkins' Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADGs) to predict outcomes in patients with COPD. METHODS: Retrospective cohorts constructed using population-based administrative data of patients with incident (n = 216,735) and prevalent (n = 638,926) COPD in Ontario, Canada, were divided into derivation and validation datasets. The primary outcome was all-cause death within 1 year. Secondary outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, COPD-specific hospitalization, non-COPD hospitalization, and COPD exacerbations. RESULTS: In both the incident and prevalent COPD cohorts, the three methods had comparable discrimination for predicting mortality (c-statistics in the validation sample of incident patients of 0.819 for the Charlson method versus 0.822 for the Elixhauser method versus 0.830 for the ADG method). All three methods had lower predictive accuracy for predicting nonfatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a disease-specific cohort of COPD patients, all three methods allowed for accurate prediction of mortality, with the Johns Hopkins ADGs having marginally higher discrimination.
    Annals of epidemiology 10/2012; 22(12). DOI:10.1016/j.annepidem.2012.09.011 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Wells et al.(1) report in the Journal the association between pulmonary artery enlargement, defined as the diameter of the pulmonary artery on computed tomography (CT) greater than the corresponding diameter of the aorta (PA:A ratio >1), and an increased risk of future exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). An increased PA:A ratio had a greater association with future COPD exacerbations than any other variable evaluated, including a history of exacerbations. Although these findings are noteworthy, their implications for clinical practice are not yet clear. Many randomized trials showing that existing therapies are effective in reducing exacerbations of COPD have . . .
    New England Journal of Medicine 09/2012; 367(10):946-8. DOI:10.1056/NEJMe1209376 · 54.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 04/2012; 184(9):1011. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.120245 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Donald A Redelmeier, Matthew B Stanbrook
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 04/2012; 184(10):1123. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.120521 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • Matthew B Stanbrook
    Annals of internal medicine 02/2012; 156(4):JC2-12. DOI:10.1059/0003-4819-156-4-201202210-02012 · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Matthew B Stanbrook
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 01/2012; 184(7):741. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.120073 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 01/2012; 184(1):E3. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.111687 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 01/2012; 184(1):E1-2. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.111480 · 5.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Canadian Medical Association Journal 11/2011; 183(18):2079. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.111739 · 5.81 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

423 Citations
899.15 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 2004–2015
    • University of Toronto
      • • Division of Respirology
      • • Department of Physical Therapy
      • • Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation
      Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 2014
    • University Health Network
      • Department of Medicine
      Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 2007–2011
    • University of Ottawa
      • • Department of Medicine
      • • Department of Pediatrics
      • • Faculty of Law
      Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
  • 2008–2009
    • The University of Western Ontario
      London, Ontario, Canada