Variation in regional implantation patterns of cardiac implantable electronic device in Switzerland

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: There is a substantial geographical variation in the rates of pacemaker (PM), implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation across European countries. We assessed the extent of regional variation and potential determinants of such variation. METHODS: We conducted a population-based analysis using discharge data for PM/ICD/CRT implantations from all Swiss acute care hospitals during 2013-2016. We derived hospital service areas (HSA) by analyzing patient flows. We calculated age- and sex-standardized rates and quantified variation using the extremal quotient (EQ) and the systemic component of variation (SCV). We estimated the reduction in variance of crude implantation rates across HSAs using multilevel regression models, with incremental adjustment for age and sex, language, socioeconomic factors, population health, diabetes mellitus, and the density of cardiologists on the HSA level. RESULTS: We analyzed implantations of 8129 PM, 1461 ICD, and 1411 CRT from 25 Swiss HSAs. The mean age- and sex-standardized implantation rate was 29 (range 8-57) per 100,000 persons for PM, 5 (1-9) for ICD, and 5 (2-8) for CRT. There was a very high variation in PM (EQ 7.0; SCV 12.6) and ICD (EQ 7.2; SCV 11.3) and a high variation in CRT implantation rates (EQ 3.9; SCV 7.1) across HSAs. Adjustments for age and sex, language, socioeconomic factors, population health, diabetes mellitus, and density of cardiologists explained 94% of the variance in ICD and 87.5% of the variance in CRT implantation rates, but only 36.3% of the variance in PM implantation rates. Women had substantially lower PM/ICD/CRT implantation rates than men. CONCLUSION: Switzerland has a very high regional variation in PM/ICD implantation and a high variation in CRT implantation rates. Women had substantially lower implantation rates than men. A large share of the variation in PM procedure rates remained unexplained which might reflect variations in physicians' preferences and practices.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.