publicdata/ahrq-gov
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
ahrq-gov/archive.ahrq.gov/research/apr97/ra1.htm
Scott Williams 58222b51ed Initial commit
2025-02-28 14:14:25 -05:00

568 lines
40 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>Research Activities, April 1997: Feature Story: John Eisenberg, Administrator; Hospitalization; Patient
Outcomes/Effectiveness Research</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
<!-- "metadata" -->
<meta name="Title" content="Research Activities, April 1997" />
<meta name="keywords" content="Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AHRQ, AHCPR, AIDS/HIV, ambulatory care, benchmark, child, cost, elderly, health cost, healthcare cost, hospital, long-term care, managed care, markets, mental health, methodology, minority health, nursing, nursing homes, outcome research, out-of-pocket spending, patient care, primary, primary care, research, rural, spending, study, Translating Research Into Practice, TRIP" />
<meta name="description" content="Online newsletter summarizing published findings from AHRQ-funded studies, new AHRQ publications and products, and funding opportunities." />
<meta name="creator" content="Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)" />
<meta name="datecreated" content="April 1997" />
<meta name="datereviewed" content="April 1997" />
<meta name="language" content="English" />
<!-- end metadata -->
<link href="/includes/archive.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<link href="/includes/ahrqstyleprint_arch.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print" />
<script>
(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){
(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),
m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)
})(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga');
ga('create', 'UA-75759936-1', 'auto');
ga(' set', 'anonymizeIp', true);
ga('send', 'pageview');
</script></head><body><!-- Google Tag Manager -->
<noscript><iframe src="//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-W4DST4"
height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"></iframe></noscript>
<script>(function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':
new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],
j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src=
'//www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);
})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-W4DST4');</script>
<!-- End Google Tag Manager -->
<noscript>
Your browser doesn't support JavaScript. Please upgrade to a modern browser or enable JavaScript in your existing browser.
</noscript>
<!-- Page Header v2.0 -->
<a name="top" id="top"></a>
<!--Begin Banner CodeS-->
<div id="ahrqbanner">
<div class="hhsportion">
<a href="#h1" class="skipnav">Skip Navigation</a>
<a href="http://www.hhs.gov" title="U.S. Department of Health and Human Services">
<img src="/images/hhs_banner.gif" alt="U.S. Department of Health and Human Services" />
</a>
<a href="http://www.hhs.gov" title="www.hhs.gov" class="hhsright">
<img src="/images/hhs_link.gif" alt="www.hhs.gov" />
</a>
</div>
<div class="ahrqportion">
<a href="/" title="Archive: Agency for Healthcare Research Quality">
<img src="/images/ahrq_banner.gif" alt="Agency for Healthcare Research Quality" />
</a><form name="searchForm" method="get" action="https://search.ahrq.gov/search" id="banner_searchform">
<label for="search" style="z-index:-1;position:relative;margin-right:-65px; font-size:0px;">Search</label>
<input name="q" type="text" value=" Search Archive" size="11" onfocus="this.value='';" class="gotext" label="Search archive" id="search" />
<input type="hidden" name="entqr" value="0" />
<input type="hidden" name="output" value="xml_no_dtd" />
<input type="hidden" name="proxystylesheet" value="ARCHIVE_Front_End" />
<input type="hidden" name="client" value="ARCHIVE_Front_End" />
<input type="hidden" name="site" value="ARCHIVE_AHRQ_GOV" />
<input src="/images/topbn_GoButton.gif" class="gobtn" name="Submit" onclick="javascript:document.searchForm.submit();" type="image" alt="Search" />
</form>
<a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/" class="ahrqright">www.ahrq.gov</a>
</div><div class="ahrqlinks"><a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/">AHRQ Home&#8212;Live Site</a> | <a href="/">Archive Home</a> | <a href="/sitemap.htm">Site Map</a> <!-- | &nbsp;<img src="/images/envelope1.jpg" alt="" width="21" height="14" /><a href="https://subscriptions.ahrq.gov/service/multi_subscribe.html?code=USAHRQ">E-mail Updates</a> --></div>
</div>
<div id="PrintBanner">
<img src="/images/printbanner_arch.jpg" alt="Archive print banner" />
</div>
<a name="h1"></a>
<!-- End banner code -->
<!-- End of Page header -->
<!-- Content Body -->
<div id="mainContent">
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" >
<tr valign="top">
<td width="70%">
<!-- Center Content section -->
<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="margin-left:10px; margin-right:10px;margin-top:5px" summary="This table gives the layout format of the bread crumb area and the center content area.">
<!--DWLayoutTable-->
<tr>
<td class="crumb_link"><div id="crumbContent">
<p><strong>You Are Here:</strong> <span class="crumb_link"><a href="/" class="crumb_link">AHRQ Archive Home</a> &gt; <a href="/research/resarch.htm" class="crumb_link"><em>Research Activities</em> Archive</a> &gt; <a href="." class="crumb_link">April 1997</a> </span></p>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><h1><a name="h1" id="h1"></a> Feature Story </h1>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><div id="centerContent"><div class="headnote">
<p>This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: <a href="https://info.ahrq.gov/">https://info.ahrq.gov</a>. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information. </p>
<p>Please go to <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/">www.ahrq.gov</a> for current information.</p></div>
<a name="head2"></a><h2>John Eisenberg takes the helm as AHCPR's new
Administrator</h2>
<p>John M. Eisenberg, M.D., has been appointed as the new Administrator of the Agency for Health
Care Policy and Research. Dr. Eisenberg was a founding Commissioner of the Congressional
Physician Payment Review Commission from 1986 through 1995 and served as its Chairman from
1993 to 1995.</p><p>
Dr. Eisenberg also will serve as the Senior Advisor to the Secretary on Quality, with AHCPR
designated as the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) lead agency for health care
quality improvement issues. One of his early priorities will be to coordinate HHS work on
behalf of the Secretary regarding the National Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and
Quality in the Health Care Industry and to chair an interagency committee on quality.</p>
<p>A clinician and researcher, Dr. Eisenberg has held a number of key positions in both academic and
clinical medicine. Most recently, he was Chairman of the Department of Medicine,
Physician-in-Chief, and Anton and Margaret Fuisz Professor of Medicine at Georgetown
University Medical Center. Previously, he served as Chief of the Division of General Internal
Medicine and was Sol Katz Professor of General Internal Medicine at the University of
Pennsylvania.</p><p>
Dr. Eisenberg was the first physician to be elected President of the Association for Health
Services Research, serving in that capacity in 1991 and 1992, and also was President of the
Foundation for Health Services Research. He has been President of the Society for General
Internal Medicine, and Vice President of the Society for Medical Decision Making. Dr. Eisenberg
is a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. He currently serves
on the Board of Regents of the American College of Physicians and has been elected a Master of
the College.</p>
<p>Dr. Eisenberg has published over 200 articles and book chapters on topics such as physicians'
practices, test use and efficacy, medical education, and clinical economics. His book, <em>Doctor's Decisions and the Cost of Medical Care</em>, was published in 1986. He was co-author of <em>Paying Physicians</em>, published in 1992, and co-editor of <em>The Physicians Practice</em>, published in 1980.</p> <p>
He graduated <em>magna cum laude</em> from Princeton University in 1968 and from the Washington
University School of Medicine in St. Louis in 1972. After his residency in internal medicine at the
University of Pennsylvania, he was a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar and
attended the Wharton School where he earned a Master of Business Administration degree with
distinction.</p>
<p>Dr. Eisenberg replaces Clifton R. Gaus, Sc.D., who recently resigned as AHCPR Administrator.</p>
<p class="size2"><a href=".">Return to Contents</a></p>
<a name="head3"></a><h1>Hospitalization</h1>
<a name="head4"></a><h2>Adverse drug events cost an average teaching hospital $5.6
million a year</h2>
<p>Dangerous and often life-threatening reactions to medications affect 6.5 percent of hospitalized
patients, and 28 percent of these reactions are preventable. These adverse drug events (ADEs)
often lead to prolonged hospital stays and higher charges; each ADE is associated with $2,595 in
additional costs to a hospital, and preventable ADEs account for nearly twice that amount
($4,685). This translates into $5.6 million ($2.8 million for preventable ADEs alone) per year for
an average 700-bed teaching hospital, according to a study supported in part by the Agency for
Health Care Policy and Research (HS07107). The substantial costs attributable to ADEs, not
including the costs of injuries to patients and malpractice costs, justify an investment in efforts to
prevent them, concludes David W. Bates, M.D., M.Sc., of Brigham and Women's Hospital, the
study's lead author.</p> <p>
Dr. Bates and his colleagues assessed the additional medical resources used by patients harmed by
drug treatment (ADEs) by observing 4,108 patients admitted to two tertiary-care hospitals over a
6-month period. They compared the resources used by patients with an ADE with similar
non-ADE patients being treated on the same unit. Patients who suffered an ADE stayed in the
hospital 2.2 days longer, and patients who suffered preventable ADEs stayed 4.6 days longer than
the non-ADE patients. Improving the systems by which drugs are ordered and administered could
prevent many of these ADEs, suggest the investigators.</p>
<p>In a previous study, they identified several factors associated with drug prescribing errors. These
include failure to notice or account for a decline in the patient's kidney or liver function that
would require alteration of drug therapy; failure to notice or account for a history of allergy to the
same medication class; using the wrong drug name, dosage form, or abbreviation; incorrect
dosage calculations; and atypical or unusual dosage frequency considerations.</p> <p>
More details are in "The costs of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients," by Dr. Bates,
Nathan Spell, M.D., David J. Cullen, M.D., M.Sc., and others, in the January 22/29 <em>Journal of
the American Medical Association</em> 277(4), pp. 307-311. </p>
<a name="head5"></a><h2>Slightly more than half of patients who want life-sustaining
treatment receive it</h2>
<p>A patient's desire to receive costly life-sustaining treatment has little influence over whether or
not the patient actually receives it, according to a study supported by the Agency for Health Care
Policy and Research (HS06655). The majority of patients want to receive a life-sustaining
treatment&#8212;such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), ventilatory support, or nasogastric
tube
feeding&#8212;if it will prolong life for any length of time. And, many patients want to have such
treatment even if it has little chance of success, explains Marion Danis, M.D., of the University of
North Carolina.</p><p>
Dr. Danis and colleagues interviewed 244 hospitalized patients (50 years of age and older) with a
6- to 12-month life expectancy due to end-stage heart, lung, or liver disease, metastatic cancer, or
lymphoma. They followed the patients for 6 months to correlate patient wishes for and subsequent
use of life-sustaining treatment during hospitalization. About 58 percent of patients wanted
life-sustaining treatment to prolong life for even 1 week. But analysis of 245 subsequent
hospitalizations showed that patients desiring such treatment were not significantly more likely to
get it than those who did not want it (55 percent vs. 51 percent).</p>
<p>This study demonstrated that patient preferences about the use of life-sustaining treatment did not
determine the use of these treatments. While the use of such treatment, particularly intensive care,
led to increased hospital costs, these higher costs were not the consequence of patient
preferences. One explanation is that doctors were the predominant decisionmakers, and doctors
often are reluctant to order procedures that will not prolong life but will increase suffering. Also,
factors such as availability of resources (e.g. ICU beds) and provider attitudes influence use of
these treatments.</p> <p>
If the amount of patient-physician disagreement about life-sustaining treatment is minimal, as in
this study, and care is satisfactory to patients and their families, it may be that patient and family
concerns are not necessarily being ignored, note the researchers. They caution, however, that if
the use and cost of life-sustaining treatments are not determined by patient preferences, then
medical futility policies which override patient wishes may yield little savings and much
divisiveness.</p>
<p>See "A prospective study of the impact of patient preferences on life-sustaining treatment and
hospital cost," by Dr. Danis, Elizabeth Mutran, Ph.D., Joanne M. Garrett, Ph.D., and others, in
<em>Critical Care Medicine</em> 24(11), pp. 1811-1817, 1996.</p>
<a name="head6"></a><h2>New classification system for rehabilitation patients provides
basis for prospective payment</h2>
<p>A new classification system that characterizes particular medical rehabilitation problems shows
promise as the basis for another prospective payment system (PPS) similar to the
diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) system used by the Health Care Financing Administration
(HCFA).</p> <p>
Hospitalized medical rehabilitation patients are currently excluded from HCFA's DRG-based PPS,
principally because they differ clinically from and tend to have longer lengths of stay (LOS) than
other acute care inpatients. Instead, a different system reimburses medical rehabilitation hospitals
and units based on "reasonable" costs per patient, which are subject to a maximum amount
regardless of the severity of the case. Because this payment system fails to adjust for a facility's
case-mix, it encourages providers to admit the least complex and least disabled patients,
potentially denying access to those most in need. </p>
<p>The new system, called the Functional Independent Measure-Function Related Group
(FIM-FRG), classifies medical rehabilitation inpatients by complexity, within categories of
impairment. The impairment categories distinguish among such conditions as stroke, traumatic
brain dysfunction, nontraumatic spinal cord dysfunction, rheumatoid arthritis, amputation, and
major multiple trauma.</p><p>
The FIM-FRG system explains more than 30 percent of variations in length of stay (LOS) for
inpatient rehabilitation, according to the final report of a study supported by the Agency for
Health Care Policy and Research (HS07595). Use of the system would more adequately scale the
level of resources to the clinical needs of patients. It also would encourage the timely discharge of
patients and thus provide incentives for cost containment, according to Margaret G. Stineman,
M.D., of the University of Pennsylvania, the study's principal investigator. HCFA is currently
evaluating the FIM-FRG system for use in the development of a PPS for medical rehabilitation.
</p>
<p>The system was developed using discharge data on 85,447 medical rehabilitation patients. The
FIM-FRGs first classify patients into one of 20 impairment categories based on the principal
medical reason for rehabilitation and then into 65 groups based on functional severity and age at
admission to rehabilitation. Like the DRGs, the system would not necessarily reinforce high
quality of care. However, Dr. Stineman and her colleagues are working on an outcomes-based
FRG system that could be used in conjunction with the LOS-based FIM-FRGs to encourage both
high quality and cost-effective rehabilitation.</p><p>
Copies of the report, <em>Function-Based Rehabilitation Classification</em>, by Dr. Stineman, are available
from the National Technical Information Service. Abstract, executive summary, and final report,
are available from the <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/research/order.htm#ntis">National Technical Information Service</a>
(NTIS accession no.
PB97-131841; 73 pp., $21.50 paper, $10.00 microfiche). </p>
<p class="size2"><a href=".">Return to Contents</a></p>
<a name="head7"></a><h1>Patient Outcomes/Effectiveness Research</h1>
<a name="head8"></a><h2>Patients over 80 benefit most from stroke prevention drug but
are least likely to get it</h2>
<p>Irregular and often rapid heart beat&#8212;or atrial fibrillation&#8212;raises the incidence of stroke
five-fold, a
risk that can be almost entirely removed with long-term use of the anticoagulant warfarin. Despite
warfarin's increased use and proven efficacy in preventing strokes in patients with atrial
fibrillation, less than 40 percent of such patients were taking warfarin in the early 1990s,
according to a study supported in part by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research
(HS07892).</p> <p>
The study found a substantial overall increase in the use of warfarin from 1980 to 1993 (from 7 to
32 percent). But in more recent years, patients 80 years or older with atrial fibrillation were
significantly less likely to be prescribed warfarin than younger patients (19 percent vs. 36
percent), even though older patients have the most to gain from its use.</p>
<p>For old and young alike, warfarin remains a complicated therapy whose management imposes
burdens on both patients and physicians. This may explain the mere 32 percent of atrial fibrillation
patients who were prescribed warfarin in 1992 and 1993. This rate is probably suboptimal given
the benefit of anticoagulation in preventing strokes, note Randall S. Stafford, M.D., Ph.D., and
Daniel E. Singer, M.D., of Harvard Medical School. They analyzed 1,062 visits by patients with
atrial fibrillation to randomly selected office-based physicians included in the National Ambulatory
Medical Care Surveys in 1980, 1981, 1985, and 1989 through 1993 to explore national patterns
of warfarin and aspirin use.</p> <p>
In 1992 and 1993, anticoagulation therapy was much more likely to be reported in visits to
cardiologists (32 percent) and general internists (40 percent) compared with general and family
practitioners (15 percent), but reports of its use were similar in women (34 percent) and men (30
percent). Aspirin use increased from 3 percent to 10 percent and showed little overlap with
warfarin use. Regional use varied dramatically, with the Midwest (46 percent), West (30 percent),
and Northeast (35 percent) having higher rates than the South (16 percent). A more recent year,
residence outside the South, patient age 65 to 74 years, and visits to cardiologists and internists
increased the independent likelihood of warfarin use. </p>
<p>See "National patterns of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation," by Drs. Stafford and Singer, in the
December 9, 1996 <em>Archives of Internal Medicine</em> 156, pp. 2537-2541.</p>
<a name="head9"></a><h2>Initial symptom severity predicts outcomes of most men with
BPH</h2>
<p>About 40 percent of men in their 70s develop benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), an enlarged
prostate that causes a range of urinary tract symptoms. Prostatectomy (surgical removal of the
prostate) is commonly performed on these men. However, recent practice guidelines issued in the
United States and internationally suggest "watchful waiting" can be considered along with surgery
for men with BPH, even those who have moderate to severe symptoms. According to a recent
study supported by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (HS06336, HS06540, and
HS08397), outcomes for most men who defer surgery depend on the severity of their initial
symptoms.</p> <p>
Of the 60 men who began the study with mild symptoms and had 4 full years of followup, 10
percent had undergone prostatectomy within 4 years, 27 percent were taking medication for BPH,
and 63 percent remained off active treatment, compared with 24 percent, 31 percent, and 45
percent, respectively, of the 245 men who began with moderate symptoms, and 40 percent, 27
percent, and 33 percent, respectively, of the 66 men who began the study with severe symptoms.
</p>
<p>These findings are based on research conducted by the Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team
led by Michael J. Barry, M.D., of Massachusetts General Hospital and his colleagues at the
University of Massachusetts, Boston; Colorado Permanente Medical Group, Denver; and the
Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA. For 4 years, they followed the
symptom progression and outcomes of 500 men with BPH who were candidates for
prostatectomy but who were initially treated nonsurgically in five North American urology
practices.</p><p>
Details are in "The natural history of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia as diagnosed by
North American urologists," by Dr. Barry, Floyd J. Fowler, Jr., Ph.D., Lin Bin, Ph.D., and others
in the January 1997 issue of <em>The Journal of Urology</em> 157, pp. 10-15. </p>
<a name="head10"></a><h2>Magnesium sulfate appears promising for preventing cerebral
palsy in preterm infants</h2>
<p>Preterm births account for most infant deaths and many long-term neurologic problems, including
cerebral palsy and mental retardation. Infants born weighing less than 1500 g (3 pounds) are most
at risk for these problems. About 5 percent of infants weighing less than 1,000 g (about 2 pounds)
and as many as 25 percent of the smallest survivors (500 to 600 g, about 1 pound) will have
cerebral palsy.</p> <p>
Several retrospective and case control studies have found an association between predelivery
administration of magnesium sulfate to mothers and reduced incidence of cerebral palsy in their
newborns. Proof of efficacy, however, is lacking. In the interim, magnesium sulfate should not be
used to prevent cerebral palsy, warns the Low Birthweight Patient Outcomes Research Team
(PORT), which is supported by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (PORT contract
290-92-0055). </p>
<p>In a recent article exploring this issue, PORT researchers Robert L. Goldenberg, M.D., and
Dwight J. Rouse, M.D., of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, point out that mothers have
been placed in serious jeopardy or even died because of excess magnesium administration, and
many newborns are thought to have experienced depressed respiration for the same reason. The
researchers recommend that clinicians wait for the results of randomized controlled trials on the
efficacy of magnesium sulfate to prevent cerebral palsy that are planned or already underway.</p><p>
The probable benefit of magnesium sulfate may be its action on three major pathways that have
been implicated in brain damage and cerebral palsy in very preterm infants. In the first,
hemorrhage occurs in the immature vasculature of the periventricular area of the brain during or
soon after birth, presumably as a result of the poorly regulated cerebral blood flow of the preterm
brain. In the second pathway, perinatal hypoxia combined with altered cerebral blood flow results
in damage to periventricular neurons due to asphyxia. Finally, in utero infection stimulates
cytokine production, which may adversely affect periventricular neurons causing hemorrhage or
other problems. Magnesium may interrupt these pathways by stabilizing vascular tone, reducing
reperfusion injury following restricted blood flow, or reducing cytokine and bacterial toxin
synthesis.</p>
<p>For more information, see "Preterm birth, cerebral palsy, and magnesium, by Drs. Goldenberg
and Rouse, in the February 1997 issue of <em>Nature Medicine</em> 3(2), pp. 146-147.</p>
<a name="head11"></a><h2>Researchers examine diagnostic techniques and therapies for
acute low back pain</h2>
<p>Low back pain affects up to 80 percent of adults at some time during their lives and is a leading
cause of disability and lost productivity. The Low Back Pain Patient Outcomes Research Team
(PORT), which was supported by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (HS06344)
and led by Richard A. Deyo, M.D., M.P.H., of the University of Washington, focused its efforts
on identifying better ways to diagnose and manage this condition. The PORT project was
completed in 1995.</p><p>
Dr. Deyo also is principal investigator for a followup study, Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies
for Low Back Pain (HS08194), which is building on and extending the work of the Low Back
Pain PORT. Dr. Deyo and his colleagues recently published the articles summarized below.</p>
<p><strong>Carey, T.S., Garrett, J., and the North Carolina Back Pain Project. (1996). "Patterns of
ordering diagnostic tests for patients with acute low back pain." <em>Annals of Internal
Medicine</em> 125(10), pp. 807-814.</strong></p><p>
Nearly half of patients suffering from acute low back pain receive x-rays&#8212;usually within 2
weeks
of first seeking care for the back pain&#8212;to diagnose the source of the problem. About 9
percent
receive computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); slightly less than
one-third of these patients receive CTs or MRIs within the first 2 weeks. Many of these tests are
unnecessary, and they are done too early and too frequently, according to this study. Clinical
guidelines and research studies advise physicians to use x-rays and other imaging technologies
conservatively when diagnosing patients with acute low back pain because it often disappears on
its own in about 4 weeks. </p>
<p>Patients with relatively long-standing low back pain plus sciatica (pain at the level of the knee or
below) are more reasonable candidates for x-rays. Yet this study shows that 20 percent of patients
with neither characteristic received x-rays from primary care doctors in North Carolina. Also, 62
percent of patients seen by chiropractors and 70 percent of those seen by orthopedic surgeons in
that State received x-rays to diagnose the source of acute low back pain, regardless of the
patient's clinical status.</p><p>
Patients who had pain that began more than 2 weeks before seeing a health care provider and no
previous episodes of low back pain were more apt to have an x-ray. Patients who were white; had
neurologic deficit, sciatica, or poor functional status (for example, found it difficult to sit or
walk); or were treated in a small group practice were more apt to have CT or MRI. Even though
patients with sciatica have a more prolonged recovery, little is lost by delaying diagnostic testing
for several weeks to determine whether spontaneous recovery will occur, as it does for 55 percent
of these patients, according to Timothy S. Carey, M.D., M.P.H., of the University of North
Carolina. Dr. Carey and his colleagues studied factors associated with use of x-rays, CTs, or
MRIs in 1,580 patients with acute low back pain at community-based, solo, and group practices
in North Carolina. </p>
<p><strong>Taylor, V.M., Deyo, R.A., Ciol, M., and Kreuter, W. (1996). "Surgical treatment of
patients with back problems covered by workers' compensation versus those with other
sources of payment."<em> Spine</em> 21(19), pp. 2255-2259.</strong></p><p>
Up to 2 percent of the industrial workforce suffers a back injury qualifying for workers
compensation each year. These back injuries have been estimated to exceed $50 billion in total
annual costs for direct health care and indirect costs for work loss and disability payments. Earlier
studies have suggested that patients receiving workers compensation may be overdiagnosed
more often than other back pain patients, resulting in excessive surgical intervention. This study
revealed similar findings. It shows that in Washington State, patients insured through workers
compensation were almost 40 percent more likely to undergo spinal fusion compared with other
low back pain patients and almost twice as likely to have subsequent reoperation within 3 years of
the initial surgery (18 percent vs. 10 percent). This was true even after adjusting for other factors
affecting the likelihood of fusion surgery, such as patient age, sex, coexisting medical conditions,
diagnosis, and specialty of the surgeon. These findings reinforce the need for a standardized
system of surgical selection criteria, conclude the researchers. They used data from Washington
State's automated hospital discharge system for 1988 through 1991. The study group included
1,502 back surgery patients receiving workers' compensation and 2,674 patients with other
sources of payment for their care.</p>
<p><strong>Deyo, R.A. (1996, November). "Acute low back pain: A new paradigm for management."
<em>British Medical Journal</em> 313, pp. 1343-1344</strong>.</p><p>
In this commentary, Dr. Deyo discusses acute low back pain guidelines recently issued by
Britain's Royal College of General Practitioners, which are similar to the AHCPR-sponsored
clinical practice guideline on acute low back problems released in late 1994. Gone are the days
when strong pain relievers and bed rest were prescribed, notes Dr. Deyo. The new approach to
managing acute back pain for otherwise well patients aged 20 to 55 years with pain that does not
radiate below the knee is as follows: x-rays, other imaging, and specialist referral are unnecessary;
bed rest is not recommended; patients should stay as active as possible and continue normal daily
activities; drugs should be prescribed at regular intervals, not as required, and should begin with
paracetamol (similar to acetaminophen, but with a slightly different formula) or nonsteroidal
antiinflammatory drugs, avoiding narcotics if possible; and finally, spinal manipulation may be
considered for relief of symptoms within 6 weeks of onset. Patients who have not returned to
ordinary activities and work within 6 weeks should be referred for an exercise program. </p>
<a name="head12"></a><h2>Pneumonia PORT publishes recent findings</h2>
<p>About 4 million cases of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) occur in the United States each
year, with about one-third of patients hospitalized. The Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research
Team (PORT) was supported by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (HS06468) to
evaluate geographic variations in hospitalization rates and to determine whether hospitalizations,
intensive care unit admissions, diagnostic tests, and certain treatments and costs could be reduced
without adversely affecting the health of pneumonia patients.</p> <p>
Led by Wishwa N. Kapoor, M.D., M.P.H., of the University of Pittsburgh, the Pneumonia PORT
recently published three studies, discussed here, to explore factors that physicians consider when
deciding whether to hospitalize patients with CAP and when to discharge them from the hospital
and to compare presenting symptoms, radiographic manifestations, an clinical outcomes of
patients with CAP of "atypical" and undetermined origin.</p>
<p><strong>Fine, M.J., Hough, L.L., Medsger, A.R., and others. (1997, January). "The hospital
admission decision for patients with community-acquired pneumonia." <em>Archives of Internal
Medicine</em> 157, pp. 36-44.</strong></p><p>
Until recently, reasons for deciding whether patients with CAP should be hospitalized have not
been well-defined, resulting in large variations in hospital admission rates. In this study, 292
medical practitioners at four geographically separate hospitals completed questionnaires to
identify the factors the clinicians considered when deciding whether or not to hospitalize a CAP
patient at low risk for short-term mortality. Low-risk CAP patients are identified as those with a
predicted probability of death of less than 4 percent. Results showed that practitioners relied
heavily on five clinical factors to make this decision: the patient's respiratory status, coexisting
illness, clinical appearance, lung involvement of more than one lobe, and oral intake. Three patient
factors were almost always associated with hospitalization: hypoxemia; inability to maintain oral
intake of foods, liquids, and antimicrobial medicines; and lack of patient home care support.
Patients without these risk factors, but whom practitioners estimated still had more than a 5
percent risk of death, also were more likely to be hospitalized.</p>
<p>However, availability of home intravenous antibiotic therapy and home nursing services would
have allowed outpatient treatment of more than half (68 percent and 59 percent, respectively) of
CAP patients initially hospitalized for treatment.</p> <p>
Although practitioners also considered psychosocial factors&#8212;such as patient reliability,
availability
of home support, patient's ability to pay, patient and/or family apprehension, and other
factors&#8212;they rarely considered patient preferences in making the decision about
hospitalization. According
to the researchers, these findings suggest that improvements in practitioners' ability to identify
low-risk patients, greater reliance on patient preferences, and increased availability of ambulatory
medical services could facilitate outpatient treatment for a large proportion of low-risk CAP
patients. </p>
<p><strong>Fine, M.J., Medsger, A.R., Stone, R.A., and others. (1997, January). "The hospital
discharge decision for patients with community-acquired pneumonia." <em>Archives of Internal
Medicine</em> 157, pp. 47-56.</strong></p><p>
Although less than half of all patients with CAP are hospitalized, length of hospital stay is a
principal determinant of total medical care costs for all patients with this illness. In this study, the
Pneumonia PORT researchers examined the factors considered by physicians in making the
hospital discharge decision. Physicians were surveyed to determine the reasons for extending the
hospital stay of patients beyond clinical stability and the medical services that could have allowed
earlier hospital discharge. The 168 physicians participating in this survey identified the following
factors as "very important" in delaying discharge of clinically stable patients: diagnostic evaluation
or treatment of comorbid illness (56 percent), completion of a standard course of antimicrobials
(15 percent), and delays with arrangements for long-term care (14 percent). </p>
<p>Information on both length of hospital stay and stability at discharge was available for 302
patients. The median length of stay was 7 days for the 29 low-risk patients who remained in the
hospital beyond reaching clinical stability and 5 days for the remaining low-risk patients. Median
length of stay was 12.5 days for the 42 medium- and high-risk patients who were hospitalized
beyond clinical stability and 8 days for the remaining 113 medium- and high-risk patients.</p><p>
Clinicians frequently cited availability of home intravenous antimicrobial infusion and home visits
by nurses as factors that would have allowed earlier discharge of clinically stable patients. </p>
<p><strong>Marrie, T.J., Peeling, R.W., Fine, M.J., and others. (1996, November). "Ambulatory
patients with community-acquired pneumonia: The frequency of atypical agents and
clinical course." <em>American Journal of Medicine</em> 101, pp. 508-515.</strong></p><p>
Many physicians believe that atypical pneumonia&#8212;that is, pneumonia caused by known
agents,
such as Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydia pneumoniae, Legionella species, and respiratory
tract viruses&#8212;has different symptoms and a different clinical course than typical bacterial
pneumonias. However, a recently published study by the Pneumonia PORT shows that both types
of CAP have similar symptoms and outcomes and, in fact, have no distinctive clinical or x-ray
features that reliably distinguish one from the other.</p>
<p>The PORT researchers examined the etiology and outcomes of 149 patients with acute pneumonia
(confirmed by x-ray), who visited the emergency department and outpatient facilities of Victoria
General Hospital in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and offices of participating family doctors based in
Halifax. Despite a higher proportion of atypical pneumonia patients reporting initial sweats, chills,
and headache, their symptom severity was similar to that of patients with pneumonia of
undetermined etiology. Thus it was not possible for clinicians to reliably distinguish between these
groups based on initial clinical features. Both groups suffered deterioration of physical
functioning, with a marked but incomplete recovery at 30 days. Both groups had similar
resolution of symptoms, functional status, return to work, and return to usual activities.</p>
<p class="size2"><a href=".">Return to Contents</a><br />
<a href="ra2.htm">Proceed to Next Section</a></p>
<div class="footnote">
<p> The information on this page is archived and provided for reference purposes only.</p></div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<!-- End of Center Content section -->
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<!-- End of Content Body -->
<!-- Footer graphic 1.2-->
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td width="125" background="/images/bottom_ahrq_bkg.jpg"><img src="/images/bottom_ahrq_1.jpg" width="125" alt="AHRQ" /></td>
<td width="100%" background="/images/bottom_ahrq_bkg.jpg" ><img src="/images/bottom_ahrq_bkg.jpg" width="10" height="34" alt="" /></td>
<td width="310" background="/images/bottom_ahrq_bkg.jpg"><img src="/images/bottom_ahrq_2.gif" alt="Advancing Excellence in Health Care" width="310" height="34" /></td>
</tr>
</table>
<!-- Footer links section -->
<div id="banner_Footer2"><p> <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/">AHRQ Home</a> | <a href="https://info.ahrq.gov" class="footer_navlink">Questions?</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/contact/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Contact AHRQ</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/sitemap.html" class="footer_navlink">Site Map</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/policy/electronic/accessibility/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Accessibility</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/policy/electronic/privacy/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Privacy
Policy</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/policy/foia/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Freedom of Information Act</a> | <a href="https://www.ahrq.gov/policy/electronic/disclaimers/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Disclaimers</a> | <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/open/recordsandreports/plainwritingact/index.html" class="footer_navlink">Plain Writing Act</a> <br />
<a href="http://www.hhs.gov" class="footer_navlink">U.S. Department of Health &amp; Human Services</a> | <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov" class="footer_navlink">The White House</a> | <a href="http://www.usa.gov" class="footer_navlink">USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web Portal</a></p>
</div>
<div id="banner_Footeraddress"><p>Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality <img src="/images/bottom_dot.gif" alt="" /> 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 <img src="/images/bottom_dot.gif" alt="" /> Telephone: (301) 427-1364</p></div>
<!-- End of Footer links section -->
</body>
</html>
Reference in a new issue View git blame Copy permalink