Dataset Information

Mortality in peripheral arterial disease: a comparison of patients managed by vascular specialists and general practitioners.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is undertreated by general practitioners (GPs). However, the impact of the suboptimal clinical management is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the mortality rate of PAD patients in relation to the type of physician who provides their care (GP or vascular specialist). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Primary care practice and academic vascular laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: GP patients (n = 60) were those of the Peripheral Arteriopathy and Cardiovascular Events study (PACE). Patients managed by specialists (n = 82) were consecutive subjects with established PAD who were referred to our vascular laboratory during the enrollment period of the PACE study. MEASUREMENTS: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality. RESULTS: After 32 months of follow-up, specialist management was associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.04; 95% CI 0.01-0.34; p = .003) and cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.01-0.65; p = .020), after adjustment for patients' characteristics. Specialists were more likely to use antiplatelet agents (93% vs 73%, p < .001), statins (62% vs 25%, p < .001) and beta blockers (28% vs 3%, p < .001). Survival differences between specialists and GPs disappeared once the use of pharmacotherapies was added to the proportional hazard model. The fully adjusted model showed that the use of statins was significantly associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.02; 95% CI 0.01-0.73, p = .034) and cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.02; 95% CI 0.01-0.71, p = .033). CONCLUSIONS: Specialist management of patients with symptomatic PAD resulted in better survival than generalist management. This effect appears to be mainly caused by the more frequent use of effective medicines by specialists.

SUBMITTER: Brevetti G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1852923 | biostudies-other | 2007 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a large and unexplained variation in referral rates to specialists by general practitioners, which calls for investigations regarding general practitioners' perceptions and expectations during the referral process. Our objective was to describe the decision-making process underlying referral of patients to specialists by general practitioners working in a university outpatient primary care center.MethodsTwo focus groups were conducted among general practitioners (10 residents and 8 chief residents) working in the Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté) of the University of Lausanne, in Switzerland. Focus group data were analyzed with thematic content analysis. A feedback group of general practitioners validated the results.ResultsParticipating general practitioners distinguished two kinds of situations regarding referral: a) "clear-cut situations", in which the decision to refer or not seems obvious and b) "complex cases", in which they hesitate to refer or not. Regarding the "complex cases", they reported various types of concerns: a) about the treatment, b) about the patient and the doctor-patient relationship and c) about themselves. General practitioners evoked numerous reasons for referring, including non-medical factors such as influencing patients' emotions, earning specialists' esteem or sharing responsibility. They also explained that they seek validation by colleagues and postpone referral so as to relieve some of the decision-related distress.ConclusionsGeneral practitioners' referral of patients to specialists cannot be explained in biomedical terms only. It seems necessary to take into account the fact that referral is a sensitive topic for general practitioners, involving emotionally charged interactions and relationships with patients, colleagues, specialists and supervisors. The decision to refer or not is influenced by multiple contextual, personal and clinical factors that dynamically interact and shape the decision-making process.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the subgroup specific associations between usual blood pressure and risk of peripheral arterial disease, and to examine the relation between peripheral arterial disease and a range of other types of vascular disease in a large contemporary cohort.DesignCohort study.SettingLinked electronic health records from 1990 to 2013 in the United Kingdom.Participants4,222,459 people aged 30-90 years, registered at a primary care practice for at least one year and with a blood pressure measurement.Main outcome measuresTime to first diagnosis of new onset peripheral arterial disease and time to first diagnosis of 12 different vascular events.ResultsA 20 mm Hg higher than usual systolic blood pressure was associated with a 63% higher risk of peripheral arterial disease (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.59 to 1.66). The strength of the association declined with increasing age and body mass index (P<0.001 for interaction) but was not modified by sex or smoking status. Peripheral arterial disease was associated with an increased risk of 11 different vascular events, including ischaemic heart disease (1.68, 1.58 to 1.79), heart failure (1.63, 1.52 to 1.75), aortic aneurysm (2.10, 1.79 to 2.45), and chronic kidney disease (1.31, 1.25 to 1.38), but not haemorrhagic stroke. The most common initial vascular event among those with peripheral arterial disease was chronic kidney disease (24.4% of initial events), followed by ischaemic heart disease (18.5% of initial events), heart failure (14.7%), and atrial fibrillation (13.2%). Overall estimates from this cohort were consistent with those derived from traditional studies when we pooled the findings in two meta-analyses.ConclusionsRaised blood pressure is a strong risk factor for peripheral arterial disease in a range of patient subgroups. Furthermore, clinicians should be aware that those with established peripheral arterial disease are at an increased risk of a range of other vascular events, including chronic kidney disease, ischaemic heart disease, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and stroke.

Dataset Information

Mortality in peripheral arterial disease: a comparison of patients managed by vascular specialists and general practitioners.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets