Skip to main content
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal logoLink to CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal
. 1998 May 5;158(9):1137–1142.

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery in Newfoundland and Labrador

G A Fox 1, J O'Dea 1, P S Parfrey 1
PMCID: PMC1229270  PMID: 9597964

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Newfoundland and Labrador, like other health care jurisdictions, is faced with widening gaps between the demands for health care and a strained ability to supply the necessary resources. The authors carried out a study to determine the rates of appropriate and inappropriate coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the province and the waiting times for this surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was performed in the tertiary care hospital that receives all referrals for coronary angiography and coronary artery revascularization for Newfoundland and Labrador. By reviewing the hospital records, the authors identified 2 groups of patients: those in whom critical coronary artery disease was diagnosed on the basis of coronary angiography and who were referred for CABG between Apr. 1, 1994, and Mar. 31, 1995, and those who actually underwent the procedure during that period. By applying specific criteria developed by the RAND Corporation, the authors determined the appropriateness and necessity of CABG in each case. They also compared waiting times for CABG with optimal waiting times; as determined by a consensus-based priority score. RESULTS: A total of 338 patients underwent CABG during the study period. The cases were characterized by multivessel disease and late-stage angina symptoms. Almost all of the patients had high appropriateness scores (7-9), and nearly 95% had high necessity scores (7-9). However, during the study period, the waiting list increased by about 20%, because a total of 391 patients were referred by the weekly cardiovascular surgery conference; the authors identified these and an additional 31 patients as having necessity scores of 7 or more. Only 7 (23%) of 31 patients for whom CABG was considered very urgent underwent surgery within the recommended 24 hours, and only 30 (24%) of the 122 patients for whom CABG was considered urgent underwent surgery within the recommended 72 hours. INTERPRETATION: These results provide evidence that the cardiac surgery program in Newfoundland and Labrador is performing CABG in patients for whom surgical revascularization is highly appropriate and necessary. Access to CABG is less than ideal, however, since the waiting list continues to expand, and many patients wait beyond the recommended time for surgery.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (113.5 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Bengtson A., Herlitz J., Karlsson T., Brandrup-Wognsen G., Hjalmarson A. The appropriateness of performing coronary angiography and coronary artery revascularization in a Swedish population. JAMA. 1994 Apr 27;271(16):1260–1265. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bernstein S. J., Hilborne L. H., Leape L. L., Fiske M. E., Park R. E., Kamberg C. J., Brook R. H. The appropriateness of use of coronary angiography in New York State. JAMA. 1993 Feb 10;269(6):766–769. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cox Jafna L. Ethics of queuing for coronary artery bypass grafting in Canada. CMAJ. 1994 Oct 1;151(7):949–953. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hampton J. R. Practice variations, appropriateness and decision analysis. QJM. 1995 Jun;88(6):365–367. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Haraphongse M., Na-Ayudhya R. K., Teo K. K., Williams R., Bay K. S., Gelfand E., Modry D., Callaghan J. C., Montague T. The changing clinical profile of coronary artery bypass graft patients, 1970-89. Can J Cardiol. 1994 Jan-Feb;10(1):71–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hillis L. D. Coronary artery bypass surgery: risks and benefits, realistic and unrealistic expectations. J Investig Med. 1995 Feb;43(1):17–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Lavis J. N., Anderson G. M. Appropriateness in health care delivery: definitions, measurement and policy implications. CMAJ. 1996 Feb 1;154(3):321–328. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Leape L. L., Hilborne L. H., Schwartz J. S., Bates D. W., Rubin H. R., Slavin P., Park R. E., Witter D. M., Jr, Panzer R. J., Brook R. H. The appropriateness of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in academic medical centers. Working Group of the Appropriateness Project of the Academic Medical Center Consortium. Ann Intern Med. 1996 Jul 1;125(1):8–18. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-125-1-199607010-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. McGlynn E. A., Naylor C. D., Anderson G. M., Leape L. L., Park R. E., Hilborne L. H., Bernstein S. J., Goldman B. S., Armstrong P. W., Keesey J. W. Comparison of the appropriateness of coronary angiography and coronary artery bypass graft surgery between Canada and New York State. JAMA. 1994 Sep 28;272(12):934–940. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Naylor C. D. A different view of queues in Ontario. Health Aff (Millwood) 1991 Fall;10(3):110–128. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.10.3.110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Naylor C. D., Baigrie R. S., Goldman B. S., Basinski A. Assessment of priority for coronary revascularisation procedures. Revascularisation Panel and Consensus Methods Group. Lancet. 1990 May 5;335(8697):1070–1073. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)92640-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Naylor C. D., Baigrie R. S., Goldman B. S., Cairns J. A., Beanlands D. S., Berman N., Borts D., Fitchett D. H., Haq A., Hess A. Assigning priority to patients requiring coronary revascularization: consensus principles from a panel of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons. Can J Cardiol. 1991 Jun;7(5):207–213. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. 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]
  14. Williams A. Economics of coronary artery bypass grafting. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Aug 3;291(6491):326–329. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6491.326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal are provided here courtesy of Canadian Medical Association

RESOURCES