Genetically Elevated C-Reactive Protein and Ischemic Vascular DiseaseZacho, Jeppe; Tybjærg-Hansen, Anne; Jensen, Jan Skov; Grande, Peer; Sillesen, Henrik; Nordestgaard, Børge G.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707402pmid: 18971492
BackgroundElevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) are associated with increased risks of ischemic heart disease and ischemic cerebrovascular disease. We tested whether this is a causal association.MethodsWe studied 10,276 persons from a general population cohort, including 1786 in whom ischemic heart disease developed and 741 in whom ischemic cerebrovascular disease developed. We examined another 31,992 persons from a cross-sectional general population study, of whom 2521 had ischemic heart disease and 1483 had ischemic cerebrovascular disease. Finally, we compared 2238 patients with ischemic heart disease with 4474 control subjects and 612 patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease with 1224 control subjects. We measured levels of high-sensitivity CRP and conducted genotyping for four CRP polymorphisms and two apolipoprotein E polymorphisms.ResultsThe risk of ischemic heart disease and ischemic cerebrovascular disease was increased by a factor of 1.6 and 1.3, respectively, in persons who had CRP levels above 3 mg per liter, as compared with persons who had CRP levels below 1 mg per liter. Genotype combinations of the four CRP polymorphisms were associated with an increase in CRP levels of up to 64%, resulting in a theoretically predicted increased risk of up to 32% for ischemic heart disease and up to 25% for ischemic cerebrovascular disease. However, these genotype combinations were not associated with an increased risk of ischemic vascular disease. In contrast, apolipoprotein E genotypes were associated with both elevated cholesterol levels and an increased risk of ischemic heart disease.ConclusionsPolymorphisms in the CRP gene are associated with marked increases in CRP levels and thus with a theoretically predicted increase in the risk of ischemic vascular disease. However, these polymorphisms are not in themselves associated with an increased risk of ischemic vascular disease.
Patients' Perception of Hospital Care in the United StatesJha, Ashish K.; Orav, E. John; Zheng, Jie; Epstein, Arnold M.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0804116pmid: 18971493
BackgroundPatients' perceptions of their care, especially in the hospital setting, are not well known. Data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey provide a portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals.MethodsWe assessed the performance of hospitals across multiple domains of patients' experiences. We examined whether key characteristics of hospitals that are thought to enhance patients' experiences (i.e., a high ratio of nurses to patient-days, for-profit status, and nonacademic status) were associated with a better experience for patients. We also examined whether a hospital's performance on the HCAHPS survey was related to its performance on indicators of the quality of clinical care.ResultsWe found moderately high levels of satisfaction with care (e.g., on average, 67.4% of a hospital's patients said that they would definitely recommend the hospital), with a high degree of correlation among the measures of patients' experiences (Cronbach's alpha, 0.94). As compared with hospitals in the bottom quartile of the ratio of nurses to patient-days, those in the top quartile had a somewhat better performance on the HCAHPS survey (e.g., 63.5% vs. 70.2% of patients responded that they “would definitely recommend” the hospital; P<0.001). Hospitals with a high level of patient satisfaction provided clinical care that was somewhat higher in quality for all conditions examined. For example, those in the top quartile of HCAHPS ratings performed better than those in the bottom quartile with respect to the care that patients received for acute myocardial infarction (actions taken to provide appropriate care as a proportion of all opportunities for providing such actions, 95.8% vs. 93.1% in unadjusted analyses; P<0.001) and for pneumonia (90.5% vs. 88.6% in unadjusted analyses, P<0.001).ConclusionsThis portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals offers insights into areas that need improvement, suggests that the same characteristics of hospitals that lead to high nurse-staffing levels may be associated with better experiences for patients, and offers evidence that hospitals can provide both a high quality of clinical care and a good experience for the patient.