Abstract
Approximately 10% to 20% of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) tests are inappropriate based on professional-society recommendations. The correlation between inappropriate MPI and quality care metrics is not known. Inappropriate MPI will be associated with low achievement of quality care metrics. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional investigation at a single Veterans Affairs medical center. Myocardial perfusion imaging tests ordered by primary-care clinicians between December 2010 and July 2011 were assessed for appropriateness (by 2009 criteria). Using documentation of the clinical encounter where MPI was ordered, we determined how often quality care metrics were achieved. Among 516 MPI patients, 52 (10.1%) were inappropriate and 464 (89.9%) were not inappropriate (either appropriate or uncertain). Hypertension (82.2%), diabetes mellitus (41.3%), and coronary artery disease (41.1%) were common. Glycated hemoglobin levels were lower in the inappropriate MPI cohort (6.6% vs 7.5%; P = 0.04). No difference was observed in the proportion with goal hemoglobin (62.5% vs 46.3% for appropriate/uncertain; P = 0.258). Systolic blood pressure was not different (132 mm Hg vs 135 mm Hg; P = 0.34). Achievement of several other categorical quality metrics was low in both cohorts and no differences were observed. More than 90% of clinicians documented a plan to achieve most metrics. Inappropriate MPI is not associated with performance on metrics of quality care. If an association exists, it may be between inappropriate MPI and overly aggressive care. Most clinicians document a plan of care to address failure of quality metrics, suggesting awareness of the problem.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.