Admission plasma glucose. Independent risk factor for long-term prognosis after myocardial infarction even in nondiabetic patients.
(17/1125)
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a relationship exists between admission plasma glucose level and long-term outcome in nondiabetic patients after an acute myocardial infarction. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study with prospective follow-up of 197 consecutive nondiabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction followed for 1.5-2.5 years at the Department of Cardiology at Karolinska Hospital. RESULTS: The mean admission plasma glucose level was 8.15 +/- 3.0 mmol/l. During follow-up, 60 (30%) patients died, 20 (10%) were rehospitalized for heart failure, 12 (6%) were rehospitalized for nonfatal reinfarction, and 79 (40%) had at least one of these events. In univariate analysis, admission plasma glucose level was significantly higher in patients who had any of the predefined events than in those without these events. In a multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model that allowed for confounding baseline predictors, admission plasma glucose level was an independent predictor of nonfatal reinfarction (P = 0.006), hospitalization for heart failure (P = 0.0034), and a major cardiovascular event (P = 0.0042) and was of borderline significance for death during long-term follow-up (P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Admission plasma glucose level in nondiabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction seems to be an independent predictor of long-term outcome. This indicates that an elevated admission plasma glucose level not only reflects acute stress, but also may be a marker of disturbed glucose metabolism that worsens the prognosis and requires intervention. (+info)
Is a third-trimester antibody screen in Rh+ women necessary?
(18/1125)
OBJECTIVE: To determine the need for routine third-trimester antibody screening in Rh+ women. STUDY DESIGN: An analytic case-control study. METHODS: We identified Rh+ pregnant women who had received prenatal care and retrospectively analyzed their laboratory data. Patients were grouped into those with a positive third-trimester antibody screen (cases) and those with a negative third-trimester screen (controls). Because entry into a group was decided by the investigators, it could not be randomized. We reviewed the maternal medical records for antibody identification and final pregnancy outcome. We also reviewed the neonatal medical records for evidence of direct Coombs-positive cord blood, anemia, need for transfusion or phototherapy, other medical complications, and death. RESULTS: Using a computerized laboratory database from 2 teaching hospitals, we identified 10,581 obstetric patients who underwent routine first- and third-trimester antibody screening between 1988 and 1997. Of these, 1233 patients were Rh- and 9348 were Rh+. Among the Rh+ patients, 178 (1.9%) had 1 or more atypical antibodies at the first-trimester screen, and 53 (0.6%) had a positive third-trimester antibody screen despite a negative first-trimester screen. Although 6 of these 53 patients (0.06% of the study population) had clinically relevant antibodies for hemolytic disease of the new-born, no significant neonatal sequelae occurred among these 6 patients. CONCLUSION: Based on the patient and hospital records studied, a repeat third-trimester antibody screen for Rh+ patients is clinically and economically unjustified. Eliminating this laboratory test from clinical practice will not adversely affect pregnancy outcomes and will decrease the costs of prenatal care. (+info)
Differences in diagnostic approach between family physicians and other specialists in patients with unintentional body weight loss.
(19/1125)
BACKGROUND: Unintentional weight loss is a diagnostic dilemma with diverse diagnostic possibilities for physicians. OBJECTIVES: Our study focused on the evaluation of differences in diagnostic approach between family physicians and physicians in other specialties. METHODS: Outpatients who visited National Taiwan University Hospital from January 1996 to December 1996 with unintentional weight loss of 5% or more within 6 months were recruited by a computer search. All data were obtained from a structured medical record audit. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the utilization of common diagnostic laboratory tests between the two groups. However, other specialists ordered more carcinoembryonic antigen tests (P < 0.01) and hepatitis B antigen tests (P < 0.05), but fewer upper gastrointestinal tract barium studies (P < 0.05) than family physicians. For patients without a definite final diagnosis, the diagnostic total costs for laboratory tests and imaging studies were lower for family physicians than other specialists (P < 0.01). For patients with biomedical disorders, the diagnostic cost was not significantly different between the two groups. For patients with psychological disorders, the costs for imaging studies were lower for family physicians than for other specialists (P < 0.05) but there was no significant difference in the total costs between these two groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the different approaches between the two groups are due to different training backgrounds and characteristics of practice. The patient-centred concepts of family physicians might be more cost-effective in dealing with undifferentiated problems. (+info)
Patients' perceptions of omitted examinations and tests: A qualitative analysis.
(20/1125)
OBJECTIVES: To understand the nature of patients' expectations for parts of the physical examination and for diagnostic testing and the meaning patients ascribe to their desires. DESIGN: Qualitative inquiry based on patient interviews and focused on perceived diagnostic omissions as "critical incidents." SETTING: Three general internal medicine practices (21 practitioners) in one mid-sized northern California city. PATIENTS: Of 687 patients visiting these practice sites and completing a detailed questionnaire, 125 reported one or more omissions of care and 90 completed an in-depth telephone interview. This study focuses on the 56 patients interviewed who did not receive desired components of the physical examination or diagnostic tests. MEASUREMENTS: Qualitative analysis of key themes underlying patients' unmet expectations for examinations and tests, as derived from verbatim transcripts of the 56 interviews. MAIN RESULTS: The 56 patients perceived a total of 113 investigative omissions falling into four broad categories: physical examination (47 omissions), conventional tests (43), high-cost tests (10), and unspecified investigations (13). Patients considered omitted investigations to have value along both pragmatic and symbolic dimensions. Diagnostic maneuvers had pragmatic value when they were seen to advance the technical aims of diagnosis, prognosis, or therapy. They had symbolic value when their underlying purpose was to enrich the patient-physician relationship. Patients in this study were often uncomfortable with clinical uncertainty, distrusted empiric therapy, endorsed early detection, and frequently interpreted failure to examine or test as failure to care. CONCLUSIONS: When patients express disappointment at failing to receive tests or examinations, they may actually be expressing concerns about the basis of their illness, the rationale for therapy, or the physician-patient relationship. (+info)
Is there a need for routine testing of ICD defibrillation capacity? Results from more than 1000 studies.
(21/1125)
AIMS: Benefits and complications of postoperative implantable cardioverter-defibrillator tests are controversial matters. This study sought to assess the necessity of defibrillation function tests after implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analysed 1007 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator tests in 587 systems and 556 patients. Nine hundred and thirty implantable cardioverter-defibrillator tests (89.4%) were routinely performed. Seventy-one tests (7%) were performed after a change in the antiarrhythmic drug regimen and six tests (0.60%) because of a suspected dysfunction of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. During routine tests, four systems (0.4%) failed to defibrillate the patient. However, in all but one test, abnormalities of the system had been observed before the test. After the addition of antiarrhythmic drugs, two of 71 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems (2.8%) failed to defibrillate the patient. One of six systems tested due to a suspected dysfunction failed to defibrillate the patient. During 16 tests (1.6%), complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that postoperative tests of the defibrillation function of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators rarely reveal dysfunctions. As testing is unpleasant for the patient and not free of complications, tests might be restricted to those patients in whom a dysfunction is suspected and to those patients in whom class I or class III antiarrhythmic drugs have been added to the antiarrhythmic drug regimen. (+info)
The value of routine preoperative medical testing before cataract surgery. Study of Medical Testing for Cataract Surgery.
(22/1125)
BACKGROUND: Routine preoperative medical testing is commonly performed in patients scheduled to undergo cataract surgery, although the value of such testing is uncertain. We performed a study to determine whether routine testing helps reduce the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative medical complications. METHODS: We randomly assigned 19,557 elective cataract operations in 18,189 patients at nine centers to be preceded or not preceded by a standard battery of medical tests (electrocardiography, complete blood count, and measurement of serum levels of electrolytes, urea nitrogen, creatinine, and glucose), in addition to a history taking and physical examination. Adverse medical events and interventions on the day of surgery and during the seven days after surgery were recorded. RESULTS: Medical outcomes were assessed in 9408 patients who underwent 9626 cataract operations that were not preceded by routine testing and in 9411 patients who underwent 9624 operations that were preceded by routine testing. The most frequent medical events in both groups were treatment for hypertension and arrhythmia (principally bradycardia). The overall rate of complications (intraoperative and postoperative events combined) was the same in the two groups (31.3 events per 1000 operations). There were also no significant differences between the no-testing group and the testing group in the rates of intraoperative events (19.2 and 19.7, respectively, per 1000 operations) and postoperative events (12.6 and 12.1 per 1000 operations). Analyses stratified according to age, sex, race, physical status (according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification), and medical history revealed no benefit of routine testing. CONCLUSIONS: Routine medical testing before cataract surgery does not measurably increase the safety of the surgery. (+info)
Provocation of electric hypersensitivity under everyday conditions.
(23/1125)
OBJECTIVES: In most previous provocation studies subjects suffering from "electric hypersensitivity" have not been able to determine correctly whether or not they have been subjected to a sham or true provocation to magnetic or electric fields. However, an often-discussed weakness is that most of the earlier provocation studies have been performed in a laboratory situation, often with simulated fields, which may not be representative of conditions prevailing in the homes or workplaces of the patients. Criticism has also been put forth about neglect of the long latency period of symptoms. Therefore, a provocation study was performed in the homes or workplaces of the patients, where we also studied the symptoms and on-off answer 24 hours after the exposure. METHODS: Fifteen subjects selected as having fast and distinct reactions from electric equipment were provoked on 4 occasions: mainly 2 true and 2 sham provocations. The intervals between exposure were a few or more days in order to provide the subjects with an opportunity to recover before the next provocation. A control group of healthy subjects with normal hearing and vision verified that the provocations were performed in a blind manner. RESULTS: The patients suffering from "electric hypersensitivity" were no better than the control group in deciding whether or not they were exposed to electric and magnetic fields. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to electric and magnetic fields per se does not seem to be a sufficient cause of the symptoms experienced by this patient group. (+info)
Eye examinations for VA patients with diabetes: standardizing performance measures.
(24/1125)
OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the potential of the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) for the calculation of a performance measure for eye exams in the diabetic population using Veterans Health Administration (VA) administrative data. DESIGN: We calculated a 1-year HEDIS-defined patient denominator and three alternative denominators that considered coding factors in identifying a VA patient as diabetic. We calculated the HEDIS-defined numerator, along with alternative specifications that captured other types of eye exams. Finally, we supplemented national data with VA pharmacy and Medicare claims data to identify all VA diabetic patients at 14 selected VA facilities and to establish a more accurate picture of non-VA health care utilization. RESULTS: The national average annual HEDIS-defined eye exam rate in the VA was 26% in fiscal 1997 compared with 39% for managed care organizations. Medicare utilization raised this by 15 percentage points at 14 northeastern VA hospitals. Over 2 years, at least two-thirds of diabetic VA patients had some type of eye exam through VA or Medicare. CONCLUSION: A HEDIS measure of eye exams for VA patients with diabetes can be calculated using VA administrative data only. However, the question remains to what extent the denominator and numerator accurately and completely identify all diabetic patients using VA services and all appropriate eye exams. We recommend caution in interpreting the results of performance measurement across different health care sectors based on what we currently know are data system limitations. (+info)