You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 302 No. 9, September 2, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Pacemakers/ Defibrillators
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Quality of Care
 •Quality of Care, Other
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Interventions
 •Cardiovascular/ Cardiothoracic Surgery
 •Prognosis/ Outcomes
 •Arrhythmias
 •Cardiac Diagnostic Tests
 •Cardiovascular Intervention
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Physician Certification and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Dr Curtis and colleagues1 studied the association of physician certification and outcomes among patients receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The authors suggested reappraisal of the need for and methods of training nonelectrophysiologists to implant ICDs if their findings of increased risk of procedural complications and decreased implantation of indicated biventricular pacemakers are confirmed.

However, there was no statistically significant increased risk in complications for the category of other specialists among all patients (relative risk [RR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.26) or for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists among the Medicare and Medicaid patients who made up 75% of their patient population (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97-1.17). Similarly, the decrease in the use of resynchronization for other specialists and for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists was small among Medicare and Medicaid patients (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00, and RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.95, respectively).

We believe that these data support directing such reappraisal . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Jalal K. Ghali, MD
jghali@dmc.org

Theodore L. Schreiber, MD
Cardiovascular Institute
Detroit Medical Center
Detroit, Michigan



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Association of Physician Certification and Outcomes Among Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator
Jeptha P. Curtis, Jeffrey J. Luebbert, Yongfei Wang, Saif S. Rathore, Jersey Chen, Paul A. Heidenreich, Stephen C. Hammill, Rachel I. Lampert, and Harlan M. Krumholz
JAMA. 2009;301(16):1661-1670.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Physician Certification and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators
Scott D. Lick, Andras C. Kollar, and Vincent R. Conti
JAMA. 2009;302(9):941.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Physician Certification and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators
Jeff Whittle
JAMA. 2009;302(9):942.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Physician Certification and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators—Reply
Jeptha P. Curtis, Jeffrey Luebbert, and Harlan M. Krumholz
JAMA. 2009;302(9):942-943.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Physician Certification and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators—Reply
James Coromilas
JAMA. 2009;302(9):943.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.