Publications (2)6.03 Total impact
-
Article: Cardiovascular disease and risk in primary care settings in the United States.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Primary care site may play an important role in cardiovascular disease prevalence; however, the distribution of risk factors and outcomes across care sites is not known. In this study, a cross-sectional analysis of 21,778 adult participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 1999 to 2008) using multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess the relation between site of usual care and disease prevalence. Patients' self-reported histories of several chronic conditions (hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolemia), awareness of chronic conditions, and associated cardiovascular events (angina, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke) were examined. After adjustment for demographic and health care utilization characteristics, there were no significant differences in the prevalence of diabetes or hypercholesterolemia among patients receiving usual care at private doctors' offices, hospital outpatient clinics, community-based clinics, and emergency rooms (ER). However, participants without usual sources of care and those receiving usual care at ERs had significantly lower awareness of their chronic conditions than participants at other sites. The odds of having a history of each of the adverse cardiovascular events ranged from 2.21 to 4.18 times higher for patients receiving usual care at ERs relative to private doctors' offices. In conclusion, participants who report using ERs as their usual sites of care are disproportionately more likely to have histories of poor cardiovascular outcomes and are more likely to be unaware of having hypertension or hypercholesterolemia. As health care reform takes place and millions more begin seeking care, it is imperative to ensure access to longitudinal care sites designed for continuous disease management.The American journal of cardiology 11/2011; 109(4):521-6. · 3.58 Impact Factor -
Article: Electronic health records, clinical decision support, and blood pressure control.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Adding clinical decision support (CDS) to electronic health records (EHRs) is required under meaningful use legislation, but there has been little national data on effectiveness in improving clinical outcomes. We sought to determine whether EHRs with CDS improved blood pressure control in US primary care visits. Study Design: We used a cross-sectional, nationally representative survey. We examined adult visits to primary care physicians using the 2007 and 2008 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). We found that patients had a mean age of 52 years, 34% were male, 15% had diabetes, and 70% were white. Rates of blood pressure control were significantly higher in visits where both an EHR and CDS (79%) were used, compared with visits where physicians used neither tool (74%; P = .004). Blood pressure control rates remained higher after adjusting for potential confounders. In unadjusted analyses, mean systolic blood pressure was 2 mm Hg lower in visits with the use of both an EHR and CDS, compared with visits where physicians used neither tool (P = .03), and this difference remained significant after adjustment. The NAMCS shows that physician use of an EHR with CDS is associated with improved blood pressure control. These findings are important because small improvements in blood pressure control are associated with reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.The American journal of managed care 09/2011; 17(9):626-32. · 2.46 Impact Factor
