Show simple item record

dc.creatorNaylor, C. Daviden
dc.creatorBasinski, Antonien
dc.creatorBaigrie, Ronald S.en
dc.creatorGoldman, Bernard S.en
dc.creatorLomas, Jonathanen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:29:04Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:29:04Zen
dc.date.created1990-10en
dc.date.issued1990-10en
dc.identifier10.2105/AJPH.80.10.1246en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationAmerican Journal of Public Health. 1990 Oct; 80(10): 1246-1256.en
dc.identifier.issn0090-0036en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Placing+Patients+in+the+Queue+for+Coronary+Revascularization:+evidence+for+Practice+Variations+from+an+Expert+Panel+Process&title=American+Journal+of+Public+Health.+&volume=80&issue=10&pages=1246-1256&date=1990&au=Naylor,+C.+Daviden
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.80.10.1246en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/734771en
dc.description.abstractA panel of 16 cardiologists and cardiac surgeons rated 438 case scenarios for the maximum acceptable delay prior to revascularization, using a scale with seven interventional time frames and two nodes for designating dubious or inappropriate cases. If consensus was defined as agreement by 12 or more panelists, only 1.4 percent of the case scenarios showed consensus on a single rating. Dividing the scale into three broad clinical categories (revascularize promptly, place on a waiting list, or no intervention), 11.4 percent of scenarios showed all 16 panelists agreeing on a single category, rising to 59.4 percent of scenarios if agreement by 12 panelists was accepted as a consensus...These findings strongly support the need for consensus criteria to ensure that triage practices are consistent and fair, and also suggest that widespread adoption of a standarized approach to revascularization priorities may be feasible.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/31876en
dc.subjectAdoptionen
dc.subjectConsensusen
dc.subjectDecision Makingen
dc.subjectDiagnosisen
dc.subjectEvaluationen
dc.subjectHealthen
dc.subjectHealth Careen
dc.subjectHealth Care Deliveryen
dc.subjectHealth Insuranceen
dc.subjectHospitalsen
dc.subjectInsuranceen
dc.subjectMethodsen
dc.subjectMorbidityen
dc.subjectMortalityen
dc.subjectNational Health Insuranceen
dc.subjectPatient Careen
dc.subjectPatientsen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectPrognosisen
dc.subjectResource Allocationen
dc.subjectRisks and Benefitsen
dc.subjectSelection for Treatmenten
dc.subjectStandardsen
dc.subjectStatisticsen
dc.subjectSurgeryen
dc.subjectTriageen
dc.subjectUncertaintyen
dc.titlePlacing Patients in the Queue for Coronary Revascularization: Evidence for Practice Variations From an Expert Panel Processen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2017 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885