Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 1995 Aug;49(4):408–412. doi: 10.1136/jech.49.4.408

Coronary revascularisation: why do rates vary geographically in the UK?

N Black 1, S Langham 1, M Petticrew 1
PMCID: PMC1060130  PMID: 7650465

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To explain the reasons for geographical variation in the use of coronary revascularisation in the United Kingdom. DESIGN--This was a cross sectional ecological study. SETTING--NHS and independent hospitals performing coronary revascularisation for the 11.6 million residents of the south east Thames, East Anglian and north western health regions in England plus Greater Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Ayr and Arran health boards in Scotland were included. SUBJECTS--All residents aged > or = 25 years in 1992-93 who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in either the public or private sector were included. MAIN MEASURES--Crude and age-sex standardised intervention rates for residents of the 42 constituent districts and boards were determined. Variation was measured using the systematic component of variation. RESULTS--Considerable systematic variations in district rates of CABG and PTCA existed. These variations mostly arose from differences in supply factors. Higher rate districts were characterised by being close to a regional revascularisation centre and having a local cardiologist. Demand factors such as the level of need in the population (measured by coronary heart disease mortality) and the lack of use of alternative treatments not only failed to explain the observed variation but were inversely associated with the rate of intervention--an example of the inverse care law. The finding that the residents of more socially deprived districts experienced higher intervention rates was probably subject to confounding due to their close proximity to specialist centres. CONCLUSIONS--If greater geographical equity of use for the same level of need is to be achieved, attention must be paid to the supply factors that determine levels of utilisation. As responsibility for purchasing these procedures is decentralised, utilisation might become even more unequal.

Full text

PDF
409

Images in this article

409Image
on p.409

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Anderson G. M., Grumbach K., Luft H. S., Roos L. L., Mustard C., Brook R. Use of coronary artery bypass surgery in the United States and Canada. Influence of age and income. JAMA. 1993 Apr 7;269(13):1661–1666. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson G. M., Lomas J. Regionalization of coronary artery bypass surgery. Effects on access. Med Care. 1989 Mar;27(3):288–296. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198903000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Black N. Geographical variations in use of surgery for glue ear. J R Soc Med. 1985 Aug;78(8):641–648. doi: 10.1177/014107688507800809. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chamberlain D., Pentecost B., Reval K., Stevens J., Boyle D. M., Cobbe S., Ballantyne D., Shaw T. Staffing in cardiology in the United Kingdom 1990. Sixth biennial survey: with data on facilities in cardiology in England and Wales 1989. Br Heart J. 1991 Nov;66(5):395–404. doi: 10.1136/hrt.66.5.395. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. English T. A., Bailey A. R., Dark J. F., Williams W. G. The UK cardiac surgical register, 1977-82. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Nov 3;289(6453):1205–1208. doi: 10.1136/bmj.289.6453.1205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hart J. T. The inverse care law. Lancet. 1971 Feb 27;1(7696):405–412. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(71)92410-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Higginson L. A., Cairns J. A., Keon W. J., Smith E. R. Rates of cardiac catheterization, coronary angioplasty and open-heart surgery in adults in Canada. CMAJ. 1992 Mar 15;146(6):921–925. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Jarman B. Underprivileged areas: validation and distribution of scores. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Dec 8;289(6458):1587–1592. doi: 10.1136/bmj.289.6458.1587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. McPherson K., Wennberg J. E., Hovind O. B., Clifford P. Small-area variations in the use of common surgical procedures: an international comparison of New England, England, and Norway. N Engl J Med. 1982 Nov 18;307(21):1310–1314. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198211183072104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Naylor C. D., Ugnat A. M., Weinkauf D., Anderson G. M., Wielgosz A. Coronary artery bypass grafting in Canada: What is its rate of use? Which rate is right? CMAJ. 1992 Mar 15;146(6):851–859. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Roos L. L., Jr Supply, workload and utilization: a population-based analysis of surgery in rural Manitoba. Am J Public Health. 1983 Apr;73(4):414–421. doi: 10.2105/ajph.73.4.414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Roos L. L., Sharp S. M. Innovation, centralization, and growth. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery in Manitoba. Med Care. 1989 May;27(5):441–452. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rose G., Marmot M. G. Social class and coronary heart disease. Br Heart J. 1981 Jan;45(1):13–19. doi: 10.1136/hrt.45.1.13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Sanderson H. F. Regional variation in cataract extraction rates and their relationship with resource supply and need. J R Soc Med. 1980 Jul;73(7):492–496. doi: 10.1177/014107688007300705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vayda E. A comparison of surgical rates in Canada and in England and Wales. N Engl J Med. 1973 Dec 6;289(23):1224–1229. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197312062892305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wennberg J. E. Dealing with medical practice variations: a proposal for action. Health Aff (Millwood) 1984 Summer;3(2):6–32. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.3.2.6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. van den Brand M. Utilization of coronary angioplasty and cost of angioplasty disposables in 14 western European countries. European Angioplasty Survey Group. Eur Heart J. 1993 Mar;14(3):391–397. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/14.3.391. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES