Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Jeptha P. Curtis is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Jeptha P. Curtis.


JAMA | 2010

Trends in length of stay and short-term outcomes among Medicare patients hospitalized for heart failure, 1993-2006.

Héctor Bueno; Joseph S. Ross; Yun Wang; Jersey Chen; María Teresa Vidán; Sharon-Lise T. Normand; Jeptha P. Curtis; Elizabeth E. Drye; Judith H. Lichtman; Patricia S. Keenan; Mikhail Kosiborod; Harlan M. Krumholz

CONTEXT Whether decreases in the length of stay during the past decade for patients with heart failure (HF) may be associated with changes in outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE To describe the temporal changes in length of stay, discharge disposition, and short-term outcomes among older patients hospitalized for HF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS An observational study of 6,955,461 Medicare fee-for-service hospitalizations for HF between 1993 and 2006, with a 30-day follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Length of hospital stay, in-patient and 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS Between 1993 and 2006, mean length of stay decreased from 8.81 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.79-8.83 days) to 6.33 days (95% CI, 6.32-6.34 days). In-hospital mortality decreased from 8.5% (95% CI, 8.4%-8.6%) in 1993 to 4.3% (95% CI, 4.2%-4.4%) in 2006, whereas 30-day mortality decreased from 12.8% (95% CI, 12.8%-12.9%) to 10.7% (95% CI, 10.7%-10.8%). Discharges to home or under home care service decreased from 74.0% to 66.9% and discharges to skilled nursing facilities increased from 13.0% to 19.9%. Thirty-day readmission rates increased from 17.2% (95% CI, 17.1%-17.3%) to 20.1% (95% CI, 20.0%-20.2%; all P < .001). Consistent with the unadjusted analyses, the 2005-2006 risk-adjusted 30-day mortality risk ratio was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.91-0.93) compared with 1993-1994, and the 30-day readmission risk ratio was 1.11 (95% CI, 1.10-1.11). CONCLUSION For patients admitted with HF during the past 14 years, reductions in length of stay and in-hospital mortality, less marked reductions in 30-day mortality, and changes in discharge disposition accompanied by increases in 30-day readmission rates were observed.


BMJ | 2009

Association of door-to-balloon time and mortality in patients admitted to hospital with ST elevation myocardial infarction: national cohort study

Saif S. Rathore; Jeptha P. Curtis; Jersey Chen; Yongfei Wang; Brahmajee K. Nallamothu; Andrew J. Epstein; Harlan M. Krumholz

Objective To evaluate the association between door-to-balloon time and mortality in hospital in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction to assess the incremental mortality benefit of reductions in door-to-balloon times of less than 90 minutes. Design Prospective cohort study of patients enrolled in the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2005-6. Setting Acute care hospitals. Participants 43 801 patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Main outcome measure Mortality in hospital. Results Median door-to-balloon time was 83 minutes (interquartile range 6-109, 57.9% treated within 90 minutes). Overall mortality in hospital was 4.6%. Multivariable logistic regression models with fractional polynomial models indicated that longer door-to-balloon times were associated with a higher adjusted risk of mortality in hospital in a continuous non-linear fashion (30 minutes=3.0%, 60 minutes=3.5%, 90 minutes=4.3%, 120 minutes=5.6%, 150 minutes=7.0%, 180 minutes=8.4%, P<0.001). A reduction in door-to-balloon time from 90 minutes to 60 minutes was associated with 0.8% lower mortality, and a reduction from 60 minutes to 30 minutes with a 0.5% lower mortality. Conclusion Any delay in primary percutaneous coronary intervention after a patient arrives at hospital is associated with higher mortality in hospital in those admitted with ST elevation myocardial infarction. Time to treatment should be as short as possible, even in centres currently providing primary percutaneous coronary intervention within 90 minutes.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2013

Door-to-Balloon Time and Mortality among Patients Undergoing Primary PCI

Daniel S. Menees; Eric D. Peterson; Yongfei Wang; Jeptha P. Curtis; John C. Messenger; John S. Rumsfeld; Hitinder S. Gurm

BACKGROUND Current guidelines for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction recommend a door-to-balloon time of 90 minutes or less for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Door-to-balloon time has become a performance measure and is the focus of regional and national quality-improvement initiatives. However, it is not known whether national improvements in door-to-balloon times have been accompanied by a decline in mortality. METHODS We analyzed annual trends in door-to-balloon times and in-hospital mortality using data from 96,738 admissions for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from July 2005 through June 2009 at 515 hospitals participating in the CathPCI Registry. In a subgroup analysis using a linked Medicare data set, we assessed 30-day mortality. RESULTS Median door-to-balloon times declined significantly, from 83 minutes in the 12 months from July 2005 through June 2006 to 67 minutes in the 12 months from July 2008 through June 2009 (P<0.001). Similarly, the percentage of patients for whom the door-to-balloon time was 90 minutes or less increased from 59.7% in the first year to 83.1% in the last year (P<0.001). Despite improvements in door-to-balloon times, there was no significant overall change in unadjusted in-hospital mortality (4.8% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.43 for trend) or in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (5.0% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.34), nor was a significant difference observed in unadjusted 30-day mortality (P=0.64). CONCLUSIONS Although national door-to-balloon times have improved significantly for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, in-hospital mortality has remained virtually unchanged. These data suggest that additional strategies are needed to reduce in-hospital mortality in this population. (Funded by the National Cardiovascular Data Registry of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.).


Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2003

The association of left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality, and cause of death in stable outpatients with heart failure ☆

Jeptha P. Curtis; Seth I. Sokol; Yongfei Wang; Saif S. Rathore; Dennis T. Ko; Farid Jadbabaie; Edward L. Portnay; Stephen J Marshalko; Martha J. Radford; Harlan M. Krumholz

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic importance of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in stable outpatients with heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND Although LVEF is an accepted prognostic indicator of prognosis in HF patients, the relationship of LVEF and mortality across the full spectrum of LVEF is incompletely understood. METHODS We examined the association of LVEF and outcomes among 7,788 stable HF patients enrolled in the Digitalis Investigation Group trial. RESULTS During mean follow-up of 37 months, mortality was substantial in all LVEF groups (range, LVEF <or= 15%, 51.7%, LVEF > 55%, 23.5%). Among patients with LVEF <or= 45%, mortality decreased in a near linear fashion across successively higher LVEF groups (LVEF < 15%, 51.7%; LVEF 36% to 45%, 25.6%; p < 0.0001). This association was present after multivariable adjustment, although the magnitude of this associated risk was reduced (LVEF <or= 15%: hazard ratio [HR] 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48 to 2.11; LVEF 16% to 25%: HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.61; LVEF 26% to 35%: HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.28; LVEF 36% to 45%: referent). In contrast, mortality rates were comparable among patients with LVEF > 45% both before (LVEF 46% to 55%: 23.3%; LVEF > 55%: 23.5%; p = 0.25), and after multivariable adjustment (LVEF 46% to 55%: HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10; LVEF > 55%: HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.09; LVEF 36% to 45%: referent). Patients with lower LVEF were at increased absolute risk of death due to arrhythmia and worsening HF, but these were leading causes of death in all LVEF groups. CONCLUSIONS Among HF patients in sinus rhythm, higher LVEFs were associated with a linear decrease in mortality up to an LVEF of 45%. However, increases above 45% were not associated with further reductions in mortality.


Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2012

The National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Data Quality Brief : The NCDR Data Quality Program in 2012

John C. Messenger; Kalon K.L. Ho; Christopher H. Young; Lara E. Slattery; Jasmine C. Draoui; Jeptha P. Curtis; Gregory J. Dehmer; Frederick L. Grover; Michael J. Mirro; Matthew R. Reynolds; Ivan C. Rokos; John A. Spertus; Tracy Y. Wang; Stuart Winston; John S. Rumsfeld; Frederick A. Masoudi

OBJECTIVES The National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) developed the Data Quality Program to meet the objectives of ensuring the completeness, consistency, and accuracy of data submitted to the observational clinical registries. The Data Quality Program consists of 3 main components: 1) a data quality report; 2) a set of internal quality assurance protocols; and 3) a yearly data audit program. BACKGROUND Since its inception in 1997, the NCDR has been the basis for the development of performance and quality metrics, site-level quality improvement programs, and peer-reviewed health outcomes research. METHODS Before inclusion in the registry, data are filtered through the registry-specific algorithms that require predetermined levels of completeness and consistency for submitted data fields as part of the data quality report. Internal quality assurance protocols enforce data standards before reporting. Within each registry, 300 to 625 records are audited annually in 25 randomly identified sites (i.e., 12 to 25 records per audited site). RESULTS In the 2010 audits, the participant average raw accuracy of data abstraction for the CathPCI Registry, ICD Registry, and ACTION Registry-GWTG were, respectively, 93.1% (range, 89.4% minimum, 97.4% maximum), 91.2% (range, 83.7% minimum, 95.7% maximum), and 89.7.% (range, 85% minimum, 95% maximum). CONCLUSIONS The 2010 audits provided evidence that many fields in the NCDR accurately represent the data from the medical charts. The American College of Cardiology Foundation is undertaking a series of initiatives aimed at creating a quality assurance rapid learning system, which, when complete, will monitor, evaluate, and improve data quality.


Circulation | 2008

Implementation and Integration of Prehospital ECGs Into Systems of Care for Acute Coronary Syndrome A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research, Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, and Council on Clinical Cardiology

Henry H. Ting; Harlan M. Krumholz; Elizabeth H. Bradley; David C. Cone; Jeptha P. Curtis; Barbara J. Drew; John M. Field; William J. French; W. Brian Gibler; David C. Goff; Alice K. Jacobs; Brahmajee K. Nallamothu; Robert E. O'Connor; Jeremiah D. Schuur

Clinical case: A 58-year-old woman called 9-1-1 with acute onset of chest pain that had persisted for 30 minutes. She had a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and type 2 diabetes mellitus but no previous history of myocardial infarction or heart failure. Her medications included aspirin, atorvastatin, lisinopril, and metoprolol. Paramedics were dispatched, and a prehospital ECG demonstrated 3- to 4-mm ST-segment elevation in leads I, aVL, and V2 through V6 (Figure 1). Her examination revealed a regular pulse of 90 bpm, a blood pressure of 100/60 mm Hg, clear lungs, and normal heart sounds with no murmurs. Paramedics interpreted the prehospital ECG and activated the catheterization laboratory en route to the hospital. On hospital arrival, the patient was transported directly to the catheterization laboratory. Coronary angiography demonstrated an occluded proximal left anterior descending artery, which was successfully treated with balloon angioplasty and a stent. The pertinent time intervals were as follows: paramedic dispatch to balloon time, 56 minutes; paramedic arrival at the scene to balloon time, 46 minutes; hospital door to balloon time, 23 minutes. Her biomarkers revealed a peak troponin T of 2.42 ng/mL and a peak creatine kinase muscle-brain isoenzyme of 26.8 ng/mL. An echocardiogram demonstrated normal left ventricular ejection fraction of 55%, with mild anterior hypokinesis, and the patient was discharged on hospital day 3. Figure 1. Prehospital ECG. American Heart Association national guidelines,1–3 as well as other consensus and scientific statements,4–11 recommend that emergency medical services (EMS) acquire and use prehospital ECGs to evaluate patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Despite these recommendations, prehospital ECGs are used in fewer than 10% of patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI),12,13 and this rate has not substantially changed since the mid-1990s. Furthermore, even when a prehospital ECG is acquired, the information is often not …


JAMA | 2011

Non-Evidence-Based ICD Implantations in the United States

Sana M. Al-Khatib; Anne S. Hellkamp; Jeptha P. Curtis; Daniel B. Mark; Eric D. Peterson; Gillian D Sanders; Paul A. Heidenreich; Adrian F. Hernandez; Lesley H. Curtis; Stephen C. Hammill

CONTEXT Practice guidelines do not recommend use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention in patients recovering from a myocardial infarction or coronary artery bypass graft surgery and those with severe heart failure symptoms or a recent diagnosis of heart failure. OBJECTIVE To determine the number, characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes of patients who receive a non-evidence-based ICD and examine the distribution of these implants by site, physician specialty, and year of procedure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Retrospective cohort study of cases submitted to the National Cardiovascular Data Registry-ICD Registry between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE In-hospital outcomes. RESULTS Of 111,707 patients, 25,145 received non-evidence-based ICD implants (22.5%). Patients who received a non-evidence-based ICD compared with those who received an evidence-based ICD had a significantly higher risk of in-hospital death (0.57% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.48%-0.66%] vs 0.18% [95% CI, 0.15%-0.20%]; P <.001) and any postprocedure complication (3.23% [95% CI, 3.01%-3.45%] vs 2.41% [95% CI, 2.31%-2.51%]; P <.001). There was substantial variation in non-evidence-based ICDs by site. The rate of non-evidence-based ICD implants was significantly lower for electrophysiologists (20.8%; 95% CI, 20.5%-21.1%) than nonelectrophysiologists (24.8% [95% CI, 24.2%-25.3%] for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists; 36.1% [95% CI, 34.3%-38.0%] for thoracic surgeons; and 24.9% [95% CI, 23.8%-25.9%] for other specialties) (P<.001 for all comparisons). There was no clear decrease in the rate of non-evidence-based ICDs over time (24.5% [6908/28,233] in 2006, 21.8% [7395/33,965] in 2007, 22.0% [7245/32,960] in 2008, and 21.7% [3597/16,549] in 2009; P <.001 for trend from 2006-2009 and P = .94 for trend from 2007-2009). CONCLUSION Among patients with ICD implants in this registry, 22.5% did not meet evidence-based criteria for implantation.


JAMA | 2009

Reduction in Acute Myocardial Infarction Mortality in the United States: Risk-Standardized Mortality Rates From 1995-2006

Harlan M. Krumholz; Yun Wang; Jersey Chen; Elizabeth E. Drye; John A. Spertus; Joseph S. Ross; Jeptha P. Curtis; Brahmajee K. Nallamothu; Judith H. Lichtman; Frederick A. Masoudi; Martha J. Radford; Lein F. Han; Michael T. Rapp; Barry M. Straube; Sharon-Lise T. Normand

CONTEXT During the last 2 decades, health care professional, consumer, and payer organizations have sought to improve outcomes for patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, little has been reported about improvements in hospital short-term mortality rates or reductions in between-hospital variation in short-term mortality rates. OBJECTIVE To estimate hospital-level 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) for patients discharged with AMI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Observational study using administrative data and a validated risk model to evaluate 3,195,672 discharges in 2,755,370 patients discharged from nonfederal acute care hospitals in the United States between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2006. Patients were 65 years or older (mean, 78 years) and had at least a 12-month history of fee-for-service enrollment prior to the index hospitalization. Patients discharged alive within 1 day of an admission not against medical advice were excluded, because it is unlikely that these patients had sustained an AMI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Hospital-specific 30-day all-cause RSMR. RESULTS At the patient level, the odds of dying within 30 days of admission if treated at a hospital 1 SD above the national average relative to that if treated at a hospital 1 SD below the national average were 1.63 (95% CI, 1.60-1.65) in 1995 and 1.56 (95% CI, 1.53-1.60) in 2006. In terms of hospital-specific RSMRs, a decrease from 18.8% in 1995 to 15.8% in 2006 was observed (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.75-0.77). A reduction in between-hospital heterogeneity in the RSMRs was also observed: the coefficient of variation decreased from 11.2% in 1995 to 10.8%, the interquartile range from 2.8% to 2.1%, and the between-hospital variance from 4.4% to 2.9%. CONCLUSION Between 1995 and 2006, the risk-standardized hospital mortality rate for Medicare patients discharged with AMI showed a significant decrease, as did between-hospital variation.


JAMA | 2009

Association of Physician Certification and Outcomes Among Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator

Jeptha P. Curtis; Jeffrey J. Luebbert; Yongfei Wang; Saif S. Rathore; Jersey Chen; Paul A. Heidenreich; Stephen C. Hammill; Rachel I. Lampert; Harlan M. Krumholz

CONTEXT Allowing nonelectrophysiologists to perform implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) procedures is controversial. However, it is not known whether outcomes of ICD implantation vary by physician specialty. OBJECTIVE To determine the association of implanting physician certification with outcomes following ICD implantation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Retrospective cohort study using cases submitted to the ICD Registry performed between January 2006 and June 2007. Patients were grouped by the certification status of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialists. Hierarchical logistic regression models were developed to determine the independent association of physician certification with outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES In-hospital procedural complication rates and the proportion of patients meeting criteria for a defibrillator with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) who received that device. RESULTS Of 111,293 ICD implantations included in the analysis, 78,857 (70.9%) were performed by electrophysiologists, 24,399 (21.9%) by nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1862 (1.7%) by thoracic surgeons, and 6175 (5.5%) by other specialists. Compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by electrophysiologists, patients whose ICD was implanted by either nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists or thoracic surgeons were at increased risk of complications in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 3.5% [2743/78,857]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 4.0% [970/24,399]; thoracic surgeons, 5.8% [108/1862]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (relative risk [RR] for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1.11 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01-1.21]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.15-1.79]). Among 35,841 patients who met criteria for CRT-D, those whose ICD was implanted by physicians other than electrophysiologists were significantly less likely to receive a CRT-D device compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 83.1% [21 303/25,635]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 75.8% [5950/7849]; thoracic surgeons, 57.8% [269/465]; other specialists, 74.8% [1416/1892]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (RR for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.91-0.95]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.88]; RR for other specialists, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-0.99]). CONCLUSIONS In this registry, nonelectrophysiologists implanted 29% of ICDs. Overall, implantations by a nonelectrophysiologist were associated with a higher risk of procedural complications and lower likelihood of receiving a CRT-D device when indicated compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist.


Circulation | 2011

Improvements in Door-to-Balloon Time in the United States, 2005 to 2010

Harlan M. Krumholz; Jeph Herrin; Lauren E. Miller; Elizabeth E. Drye; Shari M. Ling; Lein F. Han; Michael T. Rapp; Elizabeth H. Bradley; Brahmajee K. Nallamothu; Wato Nsa; Dale W. Bratzler; Jeptha P. Curtis

Background Registry studies have suggested improvements in door-to-balloon times, but a national assessment of the trends in door-to-balloon times is lacking. Moreover, we do not know if improvements in door-to-balloon times were shared equally among patient and hospital groups.Background— Registry studies have suggested improvements in door-to-balloon times, but a national assessment of the trends in door-to-balloon times is lacking. Moreover, we do not know whether improvements in door-to-balloon times were shared equally among patient and hospital groups. Methods and Results— This analysis includes all patients reported by hospitals to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for inclusion in the time to percutaneous coronary intervention (acute myocardial infarction-8) inpatient measure from January 1, 2005, through September 30, 2010. For each calendar year, we summarized the characteristics of patients reported for the measure, including the number and percentage in each group, the median time to primary percutaneous coronary intervention, and the percentage with time to primary percutaneous coronary intervention within 75 minutes and within 90 minutes. Door-to-balloon time declined from a median of 96 minutes in the year ending December 31, 2005, to a median of 64 minutes in the 3 quarters ending September 30, 2010. There were corresponding increases in the percentage of patients who had times <90 minutes (44.2% to 91.4%) and <75 minutes (27.3% to 70.4%). The declines in median times were greatest among groups that had the highest median times during the first period: patients >75 years of age (median decline, 38 minutes), women (35 minutes), and blacks (42 minutes). Conclusion— National progress has been achieved in the timeliness of treatment of patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Collaboration


Dive into the Jeptha P. Curtis's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paul D. Varosy

University of Colorado Denver

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John A. Spertus

University of Missouri–Kansas City

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge