 |
|
Analysis of Observational Studies in the Presence of Treatment Selection Bias
Effects of Invasive Cardiac Management on AMI Survival Using Propensity Score and Instrumental Variable Methods
Thérèse A. Stukel, PhD;
Elliott S. Fisher, MD, MPH;
David E. Wennberg, MD, MPH;
David A. Alter, MD, PhD;
Daniel J. Gottlieb, MS;
Marian J. Vermeulen, MHSc
JAMA. 2007;297:278-285.
Context Comparisons of outcomes between patients treated and untreated in observational studies may be biased due to differences in patient prognosis between groups, often because of unobserved treatment selection biases.
Objective To compare 4 analytic methods for removing the effects of selection bias in observational studies: multivariable model risk adjustment, propensity score risk adjustment, propensity-based matching, and instrumental variable analysis.
Design, Setting, and Patients A national cohort of 122 124 patients who were elderly (aged 65-84 years), receiving Medicare, and hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 1994-1995, and who were eligible for cardiac catheterization. Baseline chart reviews were taken from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project and linked to Medicare health administrative data to provide a rich set of prognostic variables. Patients were followed up for 7 years through December 31, 2001, to assess the association between long-term survival and cardiac catheterization within 30 days of hospital admission.
Main Outcome Measure Risk-adjusted relative mortality rate using each of the analytic methods.
Results Patients who received cardiac catheterization (n = 73 238) were younger and had lower AMI severity than those who did not. After adjustment for prognostic factors by using standard statistical risk-adjustment methods, cardiac catheterization was associated with a 50% relative decrease in mortality (for multivariable model risk adjustment: adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.52; for propensity score risk adjustment: adjusted RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.53-0.55; and for propensity-based matching: adjusted RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.52-0.56). Using regional catheterization rate as an instrument, instrumental variable analysis showed a 16% relative decrease in mortality (adjusted RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.90). The survival benefits of routine invasive care from randomized clinical trials are between 8% and 21%.
Conclusions Estimates of the observational association of cardiac catheterization with long-term AMI mortality are highly sensitive to analytic method. All standard risk-adjustment methods have the same limitations regarding removal of unmeasured treatment selection biases. Compared with standard modeling, instrumental variable analysis may produce less biased estimates of treatment effects, but is more suited to answering policy questions than specific clinical questions.
Author Affiliations: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario (Drs Stukel and Alter, and Ms Vermeulen); Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH (Drs Stukel and Fisher, and Mr Gottlieb); Department of Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, and Clinical Epidemiology and Health Care Research Program, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario (Drs Stukel and Alter); Veterans Administration Outcomes Group, White River Junction, Vt (Dr Fisher); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center, Portland (Dr Wennberg); and Division of Cardiology and the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, and Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario (Dr Alter).
RELATED LETTERS
Analytic Approaches to Observational Studies With Treatment Selection Bias
Ilya Novikov and Ofra Kalter-Leibovici
JAMA. 2007;297(19):2077.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Analytic Approaches to Observational Studies With Treatment Selection Bias
Jan P. Vandenbroucke
JAMA. 2007;297(19):2077-2078.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Analytic Approaches to Observational Studies With Treatment Selection Bias—Reply
Therese A. Stukel, Elliott S. Fisher, and David E. Wennberg
JAMA. 2007;297(19):2078.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Estimating Treatment Effects Using Observational Data
Ralph B. D’Agostino, Jr and Ralph B. D’Agostino, Sr
JAMA. 2007;297(3):314-316.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Costs and Clinical Outcomes after Coronary Multidetector CT Angiography in Patients without Known Coronary Artery Disease: Comparison to Myocardial Perfusion SPECT
Min et al.
Radiology 2008;249:62-70.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Diverging associations of an intended early invasive strategy compared with actual revascularization, and outcome in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: the problem of treatment selection bias
Hirsch et al.
Eur Heart J 2008;0:ehn438v1-10.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Beyond the Randomized Clinical Trial: The Role of Effectiveness Studies in Evaluating Cardiovascular Therapies
Nallamothu et al.
Circulation 2008;118:1294-1303.
FULL TEXT
Impact of In-Hospital Revascularization on Survival in Patients With Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome and Congestive Heart Failure
Steg et al.
Circulation 2008;118:1163-1171.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Angiography in Angina: Reliability and Validity
Hemingway et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2008;149:221-231.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Some Old and Some New Statistical Tools for Outcomes Research
Normand
Circulation 2008;118:872-884.
FULL TEXT
Survival Following Primary Androgen Deprivation Therapy Among Men With Localized Prostate Cancer
Lu-Yao et al.
JAMA 2008;300:173-181.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Inequity of access to investigation and effect on clinical outcomes: prognostic study of coronary angiography for suspected stable angina pectoris
Sekhri et al.
BMJ 2008;336:1058-1061.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evidence from Nonrandomized Studies: A Case Study on the Estimation of Causal Effects
Schmoor et al.
Am J Epidemiol 2008;167:1120-1129.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Limitations of Claims and Registry Data in Surgical Oncology Research
Nathan and Pawlik
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:415-423.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Surgical Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma - A Population-Based Study
Tan et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:600-608.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Assessing the safety of drugs through observational research
Simpson
Heart 2008;94:129-130.
FULL TEXT
Substitution of Fractionated for Unfractionated Heparin During High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Has the Problem Been Solved?
Eisenberg
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2247-2248.
FULL TEXT
Analytic Approaches to Observational Studies With Treatment Selection Bias
Novikov and Kalter-Leibovici
JAMA 2007;297:2077-2077.
FULL TEXT
Analytic Approaches to Observational Studies With Treatment Selection Bias
Vandenbroucke
JAMA 2007;297:2077-2078.
FULL TEXT
Using Observational Data to Estimate Treatment Effects
Stukel et al.
JAMA 2007;297:2078-2079.
FULL TEXT
JournalScan
Lindsay
Heart 2007;93:645-647.
FULL TEXT
Observational studies should carry a health warning
BMJ 2007;334:179-179.
FULL TEXT
Estimating Treatment Effects Using Observational Data
D'Agostino and D'Agostino
JAMA 2007;297:314-316.
FULL TEXT
|
