Predicting the Appropriate Use of Carotid Endarterectomy, Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and Coronary Angiography

Published In: New England Journal of Medicine, v. 323, Oct. 25, 1990, p. 1173-1177

by Robert H. Brook, Rolla Edward Park, Mark R. Chassin, David Solomon, Joan Keesey, Jacqueline Kosecoff

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS. In a nationally representative population 65 years of age or older, we have demonstrated that about one quarter of coronary angiographies and upper gastrointestinal endoscopies and two thirds of carotid endarterectomies were performed for reasons that were less than medically appropriate. In this paper we examine whether specific characteristics of patients (age, sex, and race), physicians (age, board-certification status, and experience with the procedure), or hospitals (teaching status, profit-making status, and size) predict whether a procedure will be performed appropriately. RESULTS. In general, we found that little of the variability in the appropriateness of care (4 percent or less) could be explained on the basis of standard, easily obtainable data about the patient, the physician, or the hospital. For all three procedures, however, performance in a teaching hospital increased the likelihood that the reasons would be medically appropriate (P = 0.09 for angiography, P = 0.30 for endoscopy, and P less than 0.01 for endarterectomy). In addition, angiographies were more often performed for appropriate reasons in older or more affluent patients (P less than 0.01 for both). Being treated by a surgeon who performed a high rather than a low number of procedures decreased the likelihood of an appropriate endarterectomy by one third, from 40 to 28 percent (P less than 0.01). CONCLUSIONS. Appropriateness of care cannot be closely predicted from many easily determined characteristics of patients, physicians, or hospitals. Thus, for the present, if appropriateness is to be improved it will have to be assessed directly at the level of each patient, hospital, and physician.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.