Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering managementin patients with coronary artery disease

David J. Harnick, Joel L. Cohen, Clyde B. Schechter, Valentin Fuster, Donald A. Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We undertook a study to determine whether there were differences in the quality of lipid management in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in 2 different practice settings (which represent different socioeconomic classes), and to determine the level of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines by academic physicians in managing patients with CAD. A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using a systematic chart review of 270 medical records (131 from the cardiology clinic, 139 from the cardiology private practice) of patients with known CAD at an academic tertiary care center in New York City. The total proportion of patients with CAD having a lipid profile ordered in the clinic and private suite was 43%. Of these people, 22% had a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) ≤100 mg/dl and 54% had an LDL ≤130 mg/dl (10% and 23% of the total population, respectively). The total proportion of patients taking lipid- lowering medications was 29%. When comparing the quality of treatment between the 2 settings, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentages of patients who had lipid profiles measured (40% clinic vs 47% private suite, p >0.10), in the percentage of patients with LDL ≤130 mg/dl (50% clinic vs 57% private suite, p >0.10) or in the weighted percentage of patients taking lipid-lowering medications (29% clinic vs 48% private suite, p = 0.099). The performances of individual physicians, however, varied widely. The percentages of patients with lipid profiles measured by individual physicians ranged from 0% to 83%, while the percentages of patients on drug treatment by a physician ranged between 10% and 88%. These findings indicate that socioeconomic differences, represented by different practice settings, do not account for differences in the screening for, control of, or use of medications in managing hyperlipidemia. Rather, individual physicians are accountable for differences in lipid management.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1416-1420
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume81
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 15 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Coronary Artery Disease
Lipids
Physicians
LDL Cholesterol
Cardiology
Private Practice
Hyperlipidemias
Tertiary Care Centers
Medical Records
Cross-Sectional Studies
Cholesterol
Guidelines
Education
Therapeutics
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering managementin patients with coronary artery disease. / Harnick, David J.; Cohen, Joel L.; Schechter, Clyde B.; Fuster, Valentin; Smith, Donald A.

In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 81, No. 12, 15.06.1998, p. 1416-1420.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harnick, David J. ; Cohen, Joel L. ; Schechter, Clyde B. ; Fuster, Valentin ; Smith, Donald A. / Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering managementin patients with coronary artery disease. In: American Journal of Cardiology. 1998 ; Vol. 81, No. 12. pp. 1416-1420.
@article{0a93778bcde14c01a4e80a8951da2d64,
title = "Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering managementin patients with coronary artery disease",
abstract = "We undertook a study to determine whether there were differences in the quality of lipid management in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in 2 different practice settings (which represent different socioeconomic classes), and to determine the level of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines by academic physicians in managing patients with CAD. A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using a systematic chart review of 270 medical records (131 from the cardiology clinic, 139 from the cardiology private practice) of patients with known CAD at an academic tertiary care center in New York City. The total proportion of patients with CAD having a lipid profile ordered in the clinic and private suite was 43{\%}. Of these people, 22{\%} had a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) ≤100 mg/dl and 54{\%} had an LDL ≤130 mg/dl (10{\%} and 23{\%} of the total population, respectively). The total proportion of patients taking lipid- lowering medications was 29{\%}. When comparing the quality of treatment between the 2 settings, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentages of patients who had lipid profiles measured (40{\%} clinic vs 47{\%} private suite, p >0.10), in the percentage of patients with LDL ≤130 mg/dl (50{\%} clinic vs 57{\%} private suite, p >0.10) or in the weighted percentage of patients taking lipid-lowering medications (29{\%} clinic vs 48{\%} private suite, p = 0.099). The performances of individual physicians, however, varied widely. The percentages of patients with lipid profiles measured by individual physicians ranged from 0{\%} to 83{\%}, while the percentages of patients on drug treatment by a physician ranged between 10{\%} and 88{\%}. These findings indicate that socioeconomic differences, represented by different practice settings, do not account for differences in the screening for, control of, or use of medications in managing hyperlipidemia. Rather, individual physicians are accountable for differences in lipid management.",
author = "Harnick, {David J.} and Cohen, {Joel L.} and Schechter, {Clyde B.} and Valentin Fuster and Smith, {Donald A.}",
year = "1998",
month = "6",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00209-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "81",
pages = "1416--1420",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering managementin patients with coronary artery disease

AU - Harnick, David J.

AU - Cohen, Joel L.

AU - Schechter, Clyde B.

AU - Fuster, Valentin

AU - Smith, Donald A.

PY - 1998/6/15

Y1 - 1998/6/15

N2 - We undertook a study to determine whether there were differences in the quality of lipid management in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in 2 different practice settings (which represent different socioeconomic classes), and to determine the level of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines by academic physicians in managing patients with CAD. A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using a systematic chart review of 270 medical records (131 from the cardiology clinic, 139 from the cardiology private practice) of patients with known CAD at an academic tertiary care center in New York City. The total proportion of patients with CAD having a lipid profile ordered in the clinic and private suite was 43%. Of these people, 22% had a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) ≤100 mg/dl and 54% had an LDL ≤130 mg/dl (10% and 23% of the total population, respectively). The total proportion of patients taking lipid- lowering medications was 29%. When comparing the quality of treatment between the 2 settings, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentages of patients who had lipid profiles measured (40% clinic vs 47% private suite, p >0.10), in the percentage of patients with LDL ≤130 mg/dl (50% clinic vs 57% private suite, p >0.10) or in the weighted percentage of patients taking lipid-lowering medications (29% clinic vs 48% private suite, p = 0.099). The performances of individual physicians, however, varied widely. The percentages of patients with lipid profiles measured by individual physicians ranged from 0% to 83%, while the percentages of patients on drug treatment by a physician ranged between 10% and 88%. These findings indicate that socioeconomic differences, represented by different practice settings, do not account for differences in the screening for, control of, or use of medications in managing hyperlipidemia. Rather, individual physicians are accountable for differences in lipid management.

AB - We undertook a study to determine whether there were differences in the quality of lipid management in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in 2 different practice settings (which represent different socioeconomic classes), and to determine the level of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines by academic physicians in managing patients with CAD. A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed using a systematic chart review of 270 medical records (131 from the cardiology clinic, 139 from the cardiology private practice) of patients with known CAD at an academic tertiary care center in New York City. The total proportion of patients with CAD having a lipid profile ordered in the clinic and private suite was 43%. Of these people, 22% had a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) ≤100 mg/dl and 54% had an LDL ≤130 mg/dl (10% and 23% of the total population, respectively). The total proportion of patients taking lipid- lowering medications was 29%. When comparing the quality of treatment between the 2 settings, there were no statistically significant differences in the percentages of patients who had lipid profiles measured (40% clinic vs 47% private suite, p >0.10), in the percentage of patients with LDL ≤130 mg/dl (50% clinic vs 57% private suite, p >0.10) or in the weighted percentage of patients taking lipid-lowering medications (29% clinic vs 48% private suite, p = 0.099). The performances of individual physicians, however, varied widely. The percentages of patients with lipid profiles measured by individual physicians ranged from 0% to 83%, while the percentages of patients on drug treatment by a physician ranged between 10% and 88%. These findings indicate that socioeconomic differences, represented by different practice settings, do not account for differences in the screening for, control of, or use of medications in managing hyperlipidemia. Rather, individual physicians are accountable for differences in lipid management.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032525823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032525823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00209-4

DO - 10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00209-4

M3 - Article

C2 - 9645890

AN - SCOPUS:0032525823

VL - 81

SP - 1416

EP - 1420

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 12

ER -