scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Thomas H. Lee

Bio: Thomas H. Lee is an academic researcher from Harvard University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Health care & Chest pain. The author has an hindex of 88, co-authored 379 publications receiving 27480 citations. Previous affiliations of Thomas H. Lee include Brown University & Brigham and Women's Hospital.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In stable patients undergoing nonurgent major noncardiac surgery, this index can identify patients at higher risk for complications and may be useful for identification of candidates for further risk stratification with noninvasive technologies or other management strategies.
Abstract: Background Cardiac complications are important causes of morbidity after noncardiac surgery. The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to develop and validate an index for risk of cardiac complications. Methods and results We studied 4315 patients aged > or = 50 years undergoing elective major noncardiac procedures in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. The main outcome measures were major cardiac complications. Major cardiac complications occurred in 56 (2%) of 2893 patients assigned to the derivation cohort. Six independent predictors of complications were identified and included in a Revised Cardiac Risk Index: high-risk type of surgery, history of ischemic heart disease, history of congestive heart failure, history of cerebrovascular disease, preoperative treatment with insulin, and preoperative serum creatinine >2.0 mg/dL. Rates of major cardiac complication with 0, 1, 2, or > or = 3 of these factors were 0.5%, 1.3%, 4%, and 9%, respectively, in the derivation cohort and 0.4%, 0.9%, 7%, and 11%, respectively, among 1422 patients in the validation cohort. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in the validation cohort indicated that the diagnostic performance of the Revised Cardiac Risk Index was superior to other published risk-prediction indexes. Conclusions In stable patients undergoing nonurgent major noncardiac surgery, this index can identify patients at higher risk for complications. This index may be useful for identification of candidates for further risk stratification with noninvasive technologies or other management strategies, as well as low-risk patients in whom additional evaluation is unlikely to be helpful.

3,183 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The relation between housestaff coverage and potentially preventable adverse events in hospitalized patients using previously tested self-report methods was studied.
Abstract: Objective: To study the relation between housestaff coverage schedules and the occurrence of preventable adverse events. Design: Case-control study. Setting: Urban teaching hospital. Patients: All ...

664 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Although this protocol should not be used to override careful clinical judgment in individual cases, the computer protocol for the most part yields accurate estimates of the probability of myocardial infarction.
Abstract: To achieve more appropriate triage to the coronary care unit of patients presenting with acute chest pain, we used clinical data on 1379 patients at two hospitals to construct a simple computer protocol to predict the presence of myocardial infarction. When we tested this protocol prospectively in 4770 patients at two university hospitals and four community hospitals, the computer-derived protocol had a significantly higher specificity (74 vs. 71 percent) in predicting the absence of infarction than physicians deciding whether to admit patients to the coronary care unit, and it had a similar sensitivity in detecting the presence of infarction (88.0 vs. 87.8 percent). Decisions based solely on the computer protocol would have reduced the admission of patients without infarction to the coronary care unit by 11.5 percent without adversely affecting the admission of patients in whom emergent complications developed that required intensive care. Although this protocol should not be used to override careful clinical judgment in individual cases, the computer protocol for the most part yields accurate estimates of the probability of myocardial infarction. Decisions about admission to the coronary care unit based on the protocol would have been as effective as those actually made by the unaided physicians who cared for the patients, and less costly. Whether physicians who are aided by the protocol perform better than unaided physicians cannot be determined without further study.

649 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Patients in whom AMI was missed were significantly younger, had less typical symptoms and were less likely to to have had prior AMI or angina or to have electrocardiographic evidence of ischemia or infarction not known to be old.
Abstract: In a prospective multicenter investigation of emergency room patients with acute chest pain, physicians admitted 96% of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and discharged 4%. Of 35 patients who were sent home with AMI, only 11 (31%) returned to the same hospital because of persistent symptoms. Compared with a control group of 105 randomly selected patients with AMI who were admitted from the emergency room, patients in whom AMI was missed were significantly younger, had less typical symptoms and were less likely to to have had prior AMI or angina or to have electrocardiographic evidence of ischemia or infarction not known to be old. Despite the less typical presentations of patients in whom AMI was missed, after controlling for age and sex, the short-term mortality rate was significantly higher among patients in whom AMI was missed but in whom it was detected through our follow-up procedures than in admitted AMI patients. As determined by independent reviewers, 49% of the missed AMIs could have been diagnosed through improved electrocardiographic reading skills or by admission of patients with recognized ischemic pain at rest or ischemic electrocardiographic changes not known to be old.

647 citations


Cited by
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: Deming's theory of management based on the 14 Points for Management is described in Out of the Crisis, originally published in 1982 as mentioned in this paper, where he explains the principles of management transformation and how to apply them.
Abstract: According to W. Edwards Deming, American companies require nothing less than a transformation of management style and of governmental relations with industry. In Out of the Crisis, originally published in 1982, Deming offers a theory of management based on his famous 14 Points for Management. Management's failure to plan for the future, he claims, brings about loss of market, which brings about loss of jobs. Management must be judged not only by the quarterly dividend, but by innovative plans to stay in business, protect investment, ensure future dividends, and provide more jobs through improved product and service. In simple, direct language, he explains the principles of management transformation and how to apply them.

9,241 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The present method addresses some of the limitations of previous measures and produces an expanded set of comorbidities that easily is applied without further refinement to administrative data for a wide range of diseases.
Abstract: Objectives.This study attempts to develop a comprehensive set of comorbidity measures for use with large administrative inpatient datasets.Methods.The study involved clinical and empirical review of comorbidity measures, development of a framework that attempts to segregate comorbidities from other

8,138 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Among patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, early palliative care led to significant improvements in both quality of life and mood and, as compared with patients receiving standard care, patients received less aggressive care at the end of life but longer survival.
Abstract: Background Patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer have a substantial symptom burden and may receive aggressive care at the end of life. We examined the effect of introducing palliative care early after diagnosis on patient-reported outcomes and end-of-life care among ambulatory patients with newly diagnosed disease. Methods We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncologic care or standard oncologic care alone. Quality of life and mood were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks with the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung (FACT-L) scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, respectively. The primary outcome was the change in the quality of life at 12 weeks. Data on end-of-life care were collected from electronic medical records. Results Of the 151 patients who underwent randomization, 27 died by 12 weeks and 107 (86% of the remaining patients) completed assessments. Patients assigned to early palliative care had a better quality of life than did patients assigned to standard care (mean score on the FACT-L scale [in which scores range from 0 to 136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life], 98.0 vs. 91.5; P = 0.03). In addition, fewer patients in the palliative care group than in the standard care group had depressive symptoms (16% vs. 38%, P = 0.01). Despite the fact that fewer patients in the early palliative care group than in the standard care group received aggressive end-of-life care (33% vs. 54%, P = 0.05), median survival was longer among patients receiving early palliative care (11.6 months vs. 8.9 months, P = 0.02). Conclusions Among patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer, early palliative care led to significant improvements in both quality of life and mood. As compared with patients receiving standard care, patients receiving early palliative care had less aggressive care at the end of life but longer survival. (Funded by an American Society of Clinical Oncology Career Development Award and philanthropic gifts; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038271.)

5,450 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The present guidelines supersede the 1994 guidelines and summarize both the evidence and expert opinion and provide final recommendations for both patient evaluation and therapy.
Abstract: The American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Task Force on Practice Guidelines was formed to make recommendations regarding the diagnosis and treatment of patients with known or suspected cardiovascular disease. Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of death in the United States. Unstable angina (UA) and the closely related condition non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) are very common manifestations of this disease. These life-threatening disorders are a major cause of emergency medical care and hospitalizations in the United States. In 1996, the National Center for Health Statistics reported 1 433 000 hospitalizations for UA or NSTEMI. In recognition of the importance of the management of this common entity and of the rapid advances in the management of this condition, the need to revise guidelines published by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute in 1994 was evident. This Task Force therefore formed the current committee to develop guidelines for the management of UA and NSTEMI. The present guidelines supersede the 1994 guidelines. The customary ACC/AHA classifications I, II, and III summarize both the evidence and expert opinion and provide final recommendations for both patient evaluation and therapy: Class I: Conditions for which there is evidence and/or general agreement that a given procedure or treatment is useful and effective . Class II: Conditions for which there is conflicting evidence and/or a divergence of opinion about the usefulness/efficacy of a procedure or treatment. Class IIa: Weight of evidence/opinion is in favor of usefulness/efficacy. Class IIb: Usefulness/efficacy is less well established by evidence/opinion. Class III: Conditions for which there is evidence and/or general agreement that the procedure/treatment is not useful/effective and in some cases may be harmful. The weight of the evidence was ranked highest (A) if the data …

5,020 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The propensity score, defined as the conditional probability of being treated given the covariates, can be used to balance the variance of covariates in the two groups, and therefore reduce bias as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In observational studies, investigators have no control over the treatment assignment. The treated and non-treated (that is, control) groups may have large differences on their observed covariates, and these differences can lead to biased estimates of treatment effects. Even traditional covariance analysis adjustments may be inadequate to eliminate this bias. The propensity score, defined as the conditional probability of being treated given the covariates, can be used to balance the covariates in the two groups, and therefore reduce this bias. In order to estimate the propensity score, one must model the distribution of the treatment indicator variable given the observed covariates. Once estimated the propensity score can be used to reduce bias through matching, stratification (subclassification), regression adjustment, or some combination of all three. In this tutorial we discuss the uses of propensity score methods for bias reduction, give references to the literature and illustrate the uses through applied examples.

4,948 citations