In this retrospective cohort of patients in the ICD registry, researchers evaluated outcomes of patients with an ICD implanted as a function of the specialty of physician that performed the procedure (71% by EP, 22% by non-EP cardiology, 2% by thoracic surgery, and 6% by other specialties). Compared to EP, adjusted in-hospital procedural complication rates were higher for non-EP cardiologists (RR 1.11, RR 1.01-1.21) and thoracic surgeons (RR 1.44, CI 1.15-1.79). Patients eligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy were also less likely to receive such a device if implanted by non-EP specialists. If your patient needs an ICD, seems best to call EP if available (abstract).
Fill in the Blanks: Q: “The diagnosis of type 2 MI is associated with a _____ prognosis. ___% of patients will live five years after their diagnosis.” The answer is a) POOR and b) a staggering 40%. I did not know that. However, what I am aware of is the ambiguity around Type 2 MIs and […]
What comes to mind when you think of getting CME? I bet most of you would say sitting in an auditorium, whether that be during your local grand rounds or at our professional society meeting, like Hospital Medicine 16 in sunny San Diego this past March. Hanging out in the Twitterverse? Probably not so much… […]
As a nurse practitioner in hospital medicine I have multiple opportunities to interact with all sorts of physician hospitalist colleagues, hospital medicine group leaders, quality officers etc. Often their interactions with me take on a certain wary curiosity, like I am some exotic monkey or another creature that is unfamiliar to them. If I am […]