Experience and outcomes in AIDS.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to S Greenfield.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In the substantia nigra, acetylcholinesterase (AChE) has non-cholinergic action on dopaminergic neurons. The subset of neurons particularly sensitive to AChE are characterized by functionally active apical dendrites extending into the pars reticulata and generating a powerful calcium conductance. This study thus attempted to establish directly the importance of these dendrites regarding the action of AChE. Segregation of the pars compacta from the pars reticulata did not affect the AChE-induced hyperpolarization on this sub-set of dopaminergic neurons. However, the ionic basis of the hyperpolarization was related to the integrity of the neurons: AChE caused an opening of potassium channels in intact cells. On the other hand when the pars reticulata containing apical dendrites was removed, an action of AChE involving the closure of calcium/sodium channels was revealed. The results demonstrate that the net effect of AChE need not be related to any particular segment of the dopaminergic neurons, whereas the nature of the mechanism underlying that effect depends on the presence, or otherwise, of the apical dendrites.
OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in the mix of patients among medical specialties and among organizational systems of care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 20,158 adults (greater than or equal to 18 years of age) who visited providers' offices during 9-day screening periods in 1986. Patient and physician information was obtained by self-administered, standardized questionnaires. SETTING: Offices of 349 physicians practicing family medicine, internal medicine, endocrinology, and cardiology within health maintenance organizations, large multispecialty groups, and solo or small single-specialty group practices in three major US cities. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic characteristics, prevalence of chronic disease, disease-specific severity of illness, and functional status and well-being. RESULTS: Among patients with selected physician-reported chronic illnesses (diabetes, hypertension, recent myocardial infarction, or congestive heart failure), increasing levels of severity were associated with decreasing levels of functional status and well-being and with increased hospitalizations, more physician visits, and higher numbers of prescription drugs. Compared with patients of general internists, patients of cardiologists were older (56 vs 47 years, P less than .01), had worse functional status and well-being scores (P less than .01), and carried more chronic diagnoses (mean 1.32 vs 1.02, P less than .01); patients of family practitioners were younger (40 vs 47 years, P less than .01) and more functional (P less than .01), carried fewer chronic diagnoses (0.70 vs 1.02, P less than .01), and (among diabetic patients only) had lower disease-specific severity scores (2.06 vs 2.30 on a five-point scale, P less than .01). Compared with patients in health maintenance organizations, patients visiting solo practitioners under fee-for-service payment were older (50 vs 45 years, P less than .01) and sicker (had worse physical functioning) and had a higher mean number of chronic diagnoses (1.10 vs 0.93, P less than .01). CONCLUSION: Patient mix is related to utilization and differs significantly across medical specialties and systems of care. These differences must be taken into account when interpreting variations in utilization and outcomes across specialties and systems, and when considering alternative policies for payment.
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether specialty and system of care exert independent effects on resource utilization. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of just over 20,000 patients (greater than or equal to 18 years of age) who visited providers' offices during 9-day periods in 1986. Patient- and physician-provided information was obtained by self-administered questionnaires. SETTING: Offices of 349 physicians practicing family medicine, internal medicine, endocrinology, and cardiology within health maintenance organizations, large multispecialty groups, and solo practices or small single-specialty group practices in three major US cities. OUTCOME MEASURES: Indicators of the intensity of resource utilization were examined among four medical specialties (family practice, general internal medicine, cardiology, and endocrinology) and five systems of care (health maintenance organization, multispecialty group-fee-for-service, multispecialty group-prepaid; solo practice and single-specialty group-fee-for-service, and solo practice and single-specialty group-prepaid) before and after controlling for the mix of patients seen in these offices. The indicators of resource utilization were hospitalizations, annual office visits, prescription drugs, and common tests and procedures, with rates estimated on both a per-visit and per-year basis. RESULTS: Variation in patient mix was a major determinant of the large variations in resource use. However, increased utilization was also independently related to specialty (cardiology and endocrinology), fee-for-service payment plan, and solo and single-specialty group practice arrangements. After adjusting for patient mix, solo practice/single-specialty groups-fee-for-service had 41% more hospitalizations than health maintenance organizations. General internists had utilization rates somewhat greater than family physicians on some indicators. CONCLUSION: Although variations in patient mix should be a major determinant of variations in resource use, the independent effects of specialty training, payment system, and practice organization on utilization rates need further explication. The 2- and 4-year outcomes now being analyzed will provide information critical to interpretation of the variations reported herein.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of a precipitating event occurring prior to the onset of fibromyalgia syndrome, in a consecutive series of patients. Outcome in patients in whom there was a causative factor was compared with that in patients with primary fibromyalgia. METHODS: Records of patients presenting over a 4-year period who fulfilled criteria for fibromyalgia were reviewed, and patients were classified as having reactive fibromyalgia if a specific event prior to the onset of illness could be identified. Outcome features, including employment status and disability compensation, were compared in patients with reactive fibromyalgia versus those with primary fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 127 patients (23%) with a primary rheumatologic diagnosis of fibromyalgia reported having trauma, surgery, or a medical illness before the onset of fibromyalgia, and were classified as having reactive fibromyalgia. Patients in this group were more disabled than those with primary fibromyalgia, resulting in loss of employment in 70%, disability compensation in 34%, and reduced physical activity in 45%. CONCLUSION: The development of fibromyalgia after a precipitating event may represent the onset of a prolonged and disabling pain syndrome with considerable social and economic implications.
Previous studies of the impact of varying reimbursement incentives on physician behavior have not explored the simultaneous implications for patients' health outcomes. Using a single group of physicians who provided care for hypertensive patients with either capitation (N = 99) or fee-for-service (N = 66) health insurance plans, physicians' test-ordering behavior and patients' subsequent health outcomes were examined. After controlling for patients' age, severity of hypertension, and level of comorbidity, it was found that patients with capitation health insurance had fewer laboratory tests and lower overall charges than the fee-for-service patients, with no clinical or statistically significant differences in 1-year health outcomes, specifically blood pressure control. The study concludes that capitation can result in reduction in charges associated with management of hypertension, without apparent compromise in proximate health outcomes.
This paper provides a broad overview of the assessment of health status in clinical practice in three parts. Yesterday: The nation has undergone a paradigm shift in health-related thinking. The former paradigm emphasized only disease; the new emphasizes health, functioning, well-being, and disease. Measures of health and disease have evolved to reflect the new paradigm. Many are designed for clinical settings, based on measurement science, and are relatively brief. These newer measures have been used to document the natural history of disease, evaluate treatment effectiveness, and improve clinical case management. Today: Two barriers block full-scale use in clinical settings. The first barrier involves the meaning and interpretation of health status scores. Patients' scores are influenced by several types of patient mix variables and the timing of measurements. Interpretation is enhanced by valid normative data displaying the variability in health status among homogenous patient groups. The second barrier is utilization and mainstreaming. It involves all of the issues associated with changing the day-to-day behavior of clinicians and providers' routine processes to facilitate routine use of health status measures in clinical settings. Tomorrow: In the next decade, the nation will attempt to overhaul the health care system. As it does so, it will struggle with many issues: 1) clarifying the true aim of health care; 2) standardizing measures of health across patients, providers, and settings to evaluate benefit; 3) establishing cause and effect among structural-input factors, care delivery processes, and health outcomes valued by society; and 4) determining if and when cost containment actions have adverse effects on health outcomes. In this context, the importance of interpreting change in health status has a central role.
OBJECTIVES: --To determine the extent to which interinstitutional variations in length of stay are explained by differences in patient characteristics and to determine whether patients in hospitals with shorter lengths of stay had worse outcomes. DESIGN: --We reviewed patients' medical records and surveyed patients between 3 and 12 months after hospital discharge using a questionnaire. SETTING: --Six teaching hospitals in California and Massachusetts. PATIENTS: --A cohort of 2484 selected patients who had been hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or to rule out acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, total hip replacement, cholecystectomy, or transurethral prostatectomy. Between 73% and 84% of the patients with each condition completed a follow-up questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASURES: --In-hospital complications, deaths, length of stay, functional status after hospital discharge, readmission, and patient satisfaction with hospital care were analyzed. RESULTS: --Significant interinstitutional differences in length of stay were noted for all conditions except rule-out acute myocardial infarction. Statistical adjustment for case-mix differences accounted for most of the interinstitutional differences in length of stay for total hip replacement but explained little of the differences in the other conditions. When we controlled statistically for other predictors, length of stay did not have a significant impact on deaths, functional status after hospital discharge, the probability of readmission, or patient satisfaction with hospital care. CONCLUSION: --More research is needed to determine the medical practices that are related to variations in lengths of stay. Routinely available outcome data may help preserve quality in the face of efforts to decrease costs by effecting more standardized practices of care.
A chart review study was done of 242 Stages A2 to D1 cancer patients to determine whether the age of patients with prostate cancer influenced their physicians' management strategies. Ten hospitals of varying size, medical-school affiliation, and patient socioeconomic status participated in this study. Patterns of prostate cancer care were examined using sets of branching logic standards in the form of criteria maps. A chart-based comorbidity index was used to control for the effect of coexisting diseases on cancer management. Regression models indicated that patient age affected the intensity of both the diagnostic evaluation and therapy, even after controlling for independent factors such as comorbid disease and individual hospital differences. Patients aged 75 years and older had significantly less intensive clinical staging workups and use of surgical and radiation therapies compared with patients aged 65 to 74 years and patients aged 50 to 64 years. In conjunction with similar results noted in studies of elderly patients with other malignancies, these results suggest that age bias is likely to be widespread. Physicians need to consider life expectancy, the ability of the patient to tolerate diagnostic procedures and therapies, and the quality of life in making treatment decisions.
Researchers and clinicians increasingly are recognizing the importance of assessing a wide range of outcomes when evaluating the efficacy of medical therapies or procedures. We developed and evaluated a set of self-report scales that assessed both generic and condition-specific aspects of health-related quality of life before and after surgery. We report data from a study of patients having one of four types of surgery at six teaching hospitals in California and Massachusetts. The four surgical conditions studied were: total hip replacement, transurethral prostatectomy, cholecystectomy, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. All the outcome scales, except for those assessing cognitive functioning and fatigue, had internal consistencies greater than 0.70. The pattern of correlations between the scales and other measures of health status are similar to those reported in other studies and provide evidence of their construct validity. The scales also appeared to be sensitive to differences between presurgical and postsurgical health-related quality of life. The results suggest that the scales used were easy to administer, reliable, valid, and offered important information about outcomes of surgery that is not provided by more traditional clinical indicators.
OBJECTIVE: Although depression is one of the most common problems of medical and psychiatric outpatients, it has not been clear whether the extent of medical comorbidity among depressed patients varies across major types of clinical settings in which depressed patients receive care--especially by type of treating clinician (general medical versus mental health specialty) or type of payment for services (prepaid versus fee-for-service). METHODS: The authors examined these issues using data on 1,152 adult outpatients with current depressive symptoms and a lifetime history of unipolar depressive disorder who received care in one of three health care delivery systems in three U.S. sites. RESULTS: Depressed patients had a similarly high prevalence (64.9%-71.0%) of any of eight common chronic medical conditions whether they were seen in the general medical or specialty mental health sector; however, those visiting medical clinicians had a significantly higher prevalence of the two most common chronic medical conditions, hypertension and arthritis. Among depressed patients with hypertension, those visiting the general medical sector were more likely to be taking antihypertensive medication than were those visiting the mental health specialty sector. Type of payment (prepaid versus fee-for-service) was unrelated to either prevalence or severity of comorbid medical conditions, suggesting that the typical depressed patient in all types of practices studied had medical comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that clinicians in all health care settings must be prepared to encounter chronic medical conditions and complaints in the depressed patients who visit them.
Quality assessment in the USA has been undertaken during the past twenty years by different institutions sponsored by the Congress, the government and professional associations. The evaluation tools which were developed reflect both the diversity of the American medical scene fashions in health care management. They evolved from norms to incentives, but each step in this evolution left its marks in the form of regulations, financial incentives and traditions.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the state of the art in the field of medical practice guidelines, to identify limitations, and to suggest future directions. DESIGN: Informal descriptive survey using a questionnaire administered by telephone, supplemented by comments, by opinions, and by examples solicited from the participating organizations. PARTICIPANTS: Eight prominent organizations representing prototypic approaches to guideline development; these organizations included three medical societies, two health care organizations, two insurers, and one private health benefits management company. RESULTS: Improving the quality of medical care was a stated goal of all eight surveyed organizations. However, their objectives have not been stated in operational terms, reflecting the lesser emphasis placed on methods and means for both implementing guidelines and evaluating their impact on health practices and outcomes. In contrast, several systematic methods for developing guidelines exist. They differ in the stress placed on formal literature reviews, reliance on local as opposed to national experts, and formal methods of group judgment, but no evidence exists on which approaches produce sounder and more usable guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines are being vigorously promoted as a means to improve the effectiveness of the health care system. Current initiatives show both strengths and weaknesses. In particular, the attention now paid to the development of guidelines needs to be matched by attention to implementation strategies and to the scientific evaluation of their effectiveness in real clinical settings. Also, more agreement is needed on acceptable methods for developing guidelines, assessing their content, and evaluating their impact on professional behavior, patient outcomes, and health care costs. Fortunately, several initiatives to bring greater order and quality to this field are under way.
An adolescent male presented with hematuria and flank pain. Transient focal renal parenchymal defects were demonstrated by ultrasonography, radionuclide scintigraphy and computed tomography. Renal biopsy revealed IgA nephropathy with acute tubular necrosis. This peculiar radiographic pattern has not, to our knowledge, been previously described in IgA nephropathy and may relate to tubule cell damage by red blood cell casts or patchy renal ischemia.
A central issue in health policy with regard to the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is whether quality of care and patient outcomes are affected by resource constraints. In an earlier study of 15 California hospitals between October 1986 and October 1987, we observed a markedly lower in-hospital mortality rate for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in the group of patients treated in hospitals that had a high level of experience with AIDS relative to the group treated in hospitals with low experience. We present the patterns of resource use at hospitals with high and low AIDS familiarity. Average charges and resource use did not differ between the two groups of hospitalized patients; however, there were marked variations in how the resources were used. Among survivors, patients who received care at hospitals with high AIDS familiarity stayed in the hospital longer, underwent a bronchoscopy more often, stayed in an intensive care unit longer, and accrued higher average total charges than patients at hospitals with low AIDS familiarity. Conversely, among nonsurvivors, a greater intensity of care was received at the hospitals with low AIDS familiarity. These results suggest that, in these 15 hospitals, the markedly higher rate of in-hospital death at hospitals with low AIDS familiarity was not related to the quantity of resources that were used; rather it was related to differences in how the resources were used. Our results show that additional resources significantly improved the chances of in-hospital survival for patients at hospitals with high AIDS familiarity, but did not affect the chances of survival in hospitals with low AIDS familiarity. Our findings suggest that physicians in those hospitals in which the care of patients with AIDS is relatively infrequent might improve the chances of in-hospital survival of patients with AIDS by more timely and efficient use of resources.
We estimated clinicians' awareness of depression for patients with current depressive disorder (N = 650) who received care in either a single-specialty solo or small group practice, a large multispecialty group practice, or a health maintenance organization in three US sites. Depressive disorder was determined by independent diagnostic assessment shortly after an office visit. Detection and treatment of depression were determined from visit-report forms completed by the treating clinician. Depending on the setting, from 78.2% to 86.9% of depressed patients who visited mental health specialists had their depression detected at the time of the visit, compared with 45.9% to 51.2% of depressed patients who visited medical clinicians, after adjusting for case-mix differences. Among patients of mental health specialists, there were no significant differences by type of payment in the likelihood of depressive disorder being detected or treated. Among patients of medical clinicians, however, those receiving care financed by prepayment were significantly less likely to have their depression detected or treated during the visit than were similar patients receiving fee-for-service care.
The Medical Outcomes Study was designed to (1) determine whether variations in patient outcomes are explained by differences in system of care, clinician specialty, and clinicians' technical and interpersonal styles and (2) develop more practical tools for the routine monitoring of patient outcomes in medical practice. Outcomes included clinical end points; physical, social, and role functioning in everyday living; patients' perceptions of their general health and well-being; and satisfaction with treatment. Populations of clinicians (n = 523) were randomly sampled from different health care settings in Boston, Mass; Chicago, Ill; and Los Angeles, Calif. In the cross-sectional study, adult patients (n = 22,462) evaluated their health status and treatment. A sample of these patients (n = 2349) with diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, and/or depression were selected for the longitudinal study. Their hospitalizations and other treatments were monitored and they periodically reported outcomes of care. At the beginning and end of the longitudinal study, Medical Outcomes Study staff performed physical examinations and laboratory tests. Results will be reported serially, primarily in The Journal.