This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Edwin D. Huff, PhD
Amherst, NH

JAMA. 1997;277(19):1518-1519.

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

To the Editor.

—In reporting no apparent difference between declining coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery mortality rate trends in Massachusetts and in New York and northern New England, Dr Ghali and colleagues¹ have identified something that could be characterized as embarrassing or, at least, surprising. What makes their conclusions difficult to interpret is the absence of information about what did or did not systematically happen during the periods studied.

It is apparent from the titles and content of the article by Ghali et al,¹ the accompanying Editorial by Dr Jencks,² and an earlier Editorial by Berwick³ that these authors have assumed that concerted quality improvement efforts took place during the periods surveilled. That the distinctive improvement efforts of any locale constituted any sort of systematic or stable and sustained intervention for any interim period studied is not apparent after reading the source articles.^4,5 How . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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