[Quality assurance in invasive cardiology. A prospective study for the evaluation of indications for coronary angiography and coronary dilatation using the "Rand Corporation" method].

OBJECTIVE

To assess the indications for coronary angiography and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) according to the criteria of the RAND Corporation's expert panel ratings; to compare the results with those already published in the literature; and to examine the method with respect to its appropriateness as a measure of quality control.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

The parameters necessary for rating according to the RAND Corporation's published criteria were prospectively obtained in 116 consecutive patients (89 men, 27 women; mean age 59.4 +/- 10.7 years) undergoing coronary angiography and 138 patients (112 men, 26 women; mean age 61.5 +/- 9.4 years) undergoing PTCA.

RESULTS

For coronary angiography the >>inappropriate rate << was 22.4%, for >> uncertain indications << 15.5%, >> appropriate indications << 24.1%, and for >> necessary indications << 37.9%. 38.6% of coronary angiographies, performed in the course of angiographic control after PTCA, were >> inappropriate <<, but only 12.5% of other coronary angiographies (P < 0.01). In 48.6% of >> appropriate << or >> necessary << procedures invasive treatment followed, compared with 19.2% of those rated >> inappropriate << (P < 0.05). In 10.1% of patients the indications for PTCA were judged >> inappropriate <<, in 32.6% as >> uncertain <<, in 13.0% as >> appropriate << and 44.2% as >> necessary <<. There was no correlation between ratings and the acute results of PTCA. These findings pertaining to indications for coronary angiography and PTCA correspond to those reported in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

As the RAND criteria take inadequate account of individual peculiarities, they are not suitable for individual clinical decisions. But they are useful as screening method in a quality control project, because procedures for which indications have not been adequately proven are singled out by an unfavourable rating and can thus be thoroughly analysed in the individual case.