Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multidisciplinary Aortic Centers

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diseases of the Aorta

  • 1053 Accesses

Abstract

A multidisciplinary aortic center has the capacity to improve patient outcomes by coordinating a multidisciplinary team of experts and specialists who collaborate to improve diagnosis, treatment, and longitudinal surveillance of aortic pathology, providing a cross-continuum of care. Creation of such a center involves planning to determine organization and structure, the development of vascular and multidisciplinary teams, and the mechanisms for their collaboration, as well as targeted marketing and networking to identify patients and create a strong referral base. Contributions to the field through research and innovation and the ability to offer high-value care are benefits of the move toward a multidisciplinary approach to aortic care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Arko F, Gable D. Why build an aortic center? EV Today. 2015;14(Suppl):S5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hall MF. Looking to improve financial results? Start by listening to patients: improving patient satisfaction can have a direct impact on your hospital’s reputation--and financial results. Healthc Financ Manage. 2008;62(10):76–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Porter ME, Lee TH. The strategy that will fix health care. Harv Bus Rev. 2013;91(12):24.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arko F, Christoforatos O, Coulter C, Doty JR, Draper TA, Gable DR, Kruger B, Loran D, Maini B, Mewissen MW, Tassiopoulos AK, Weiss ES, Regan M, Shaver D. Toolkit: building a comprehensive aortic center program. Medtronic. c2015.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Porter ME, Lee TH. Why health care is stuck—and how to fix it. Harvard Business Review. Accessed 17 Sept 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Loran D, Tassiopoulos AK, Coulter C, Christoforatos O. The aortic center tool kit: pathway for institutional growth. EV Today. 2015;14(Suppl):S22–8.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wood DA, Kotseva K, Connolly S, Jennings C, Mead A, Jones J, Holden A, De Bacquer D, Collier T, De Backer G, Faergeman O. Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary, family-based cardiovascular disease prevention programme (EUROACTION) for patients with coronary heart disease and asymptomatic individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a paired, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9629):1999–2012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schoenhagen P. Coronary artery imaging with multidetector computed tomography: a call for an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach. Am Heart J. 2006;151(5):945–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rinfret S, Lussier MT, Peirce A, Duhamel F, Cossette S, Lalonde L, Tremblay C, Guertin MC, LeLorier J, Turgeon J, Hamet P. The impact of a multidisciplinary information technology–supported program on blood pressure control in primary care. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2009;2(3):170–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Medical College of Wisconsin. Team approach reduces cardiovascular risk for obese patients with metabolic syndrome. Cardiovascular Business Week. 2006 May;23:206.

    Google Scholar 

  11. James BC, Lazar JS. Health system use of clinical programs to build quality infrastructure. In: Nelson EC, Batalden PB, Lazar JS, editors. Practice-based learning and improvement: a clinical improvement action guide. Oakbrook Terrace: Joint Commission Resources; 2007. p. 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bohmer RM. The hard work of health care transformation. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):709–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bohmer RMJ. Designing care: aligning the nature and management of health care. Boston: Harvard Business Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Doty J, Kruger B, Weiss E, Mewissen M, Coulter C, Draper T. Meet the challenge: aortic center strategic planning, investments, and tactics. EV Today. 2015;14(Suppl):S12–9.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Collins S, Jacobs J, Perryman R. Dyad leadership: 1+ 1=> 2. Prog Pediatr Cardiol. 2016;42:35–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cronenwett JL. Changes in board certification could improve vascular surgery training. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39(4):913–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnston MJ, Singh P, Pucher PH, Fitzgerald JE, Aggarwal R, Arora S, Darzi A. Systematic review with meta-analysis of the impact of surgical fellowship training on patient outcomes. Br J Surg. 2015;102(10):1156–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cacoub PP, Abola MT, Baumgartner I, Bhatt DL, Creager MA, Liau CS, Goto S, Röther J, Steg PG, Hirsch AT, REACH Registry Investigators. Cardiovascular risk factor control and outcomes in peripheral artery disease patients in the reduction of Atherothrombosis for continued health (REACH) registry. Atherosclerosis. 2009;204(2):e86–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bhatt D. et al. MedPAC. Report to the Congress. June 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Criqui M, Boyans V. Epidemiology of peripheral artery disease. Circ Res. 2015;116:1509–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Suzuki T, Mehta RH, Ince H, Nagai R, Sakomura Y, Weber F, Sumiyoshi T, Bossone E, Trimarchi S, Cooper JV, Smith DE. Clinical profiles and outcomes of acute type B aortic dissection in the current era: lessons from the international registry of aortic dissection (IRAD). Circulation. 2003;108(10 suppl 1):II–312.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hendel RC, Patel MR, Kramer CM, Poon M, Carr JC, Gerstad NA, Gillam LD, Hodgson JM, Kim RJ, Lesser JR, Martin ET. ACCF/ACR/SCCT/SCMR/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SIR 2006 Appropriateness criteria for cardiac computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Quality Strategic Directions Committee Appropriateness Criteria Working Group, American College of Radiology, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, North American Society for Cardiac Imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(7):1475–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease. Executive summary. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1509–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cury M, Zeidan F, Lobato AC. Aortic disease in the young: genetic aneurysm syndromes, connective tissue disorders, and familial aortic aneurysms and dissections. J Vasc Med. 2013;2013:267215.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sarnak MJ. Cardiovascular complications in chronic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis. 2003;41:11–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Pursuing Perfection: Report from Hackensack University Medical Center on Multidisciplinary Rounds. Retrieved Nov. 2016 November.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Harris KM, Strauss CE, Eagle KA, Hirsch AT, Isselbacher EM, Tsai TT, Shiran H, Fattori R, Evangelista A, Cooper JV, Montgomery DG. Correlates of delayed recognition and treatment of acute type a aortic dissection the international registry of acute aortic dissection (IRAD). Circulation. 2011;124(18):1911–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fortenberry JL Jr, McGoldrick PJ. Internal marketing: a pathway for healthcare facilities to improve the patient experience. Int J Healthcare Manag. 2016;9(1):28–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Grueninger UJ. Arterial hypertension: lessons from patient education. Patient Educ Couns. 1995;26(1):37–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Davis TC, Crouch MA, Wills G, Miller S, Abdehou DM. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Olin T, Sealove B. Peripheral artery disease: current insight into the disease and its diagnosis and management. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(7):678–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Shreibati JB, Baker LC, Hlatky MA, Mell MW. Impact of the screening abdominal aortic aneurysms very efficiently (SAAAVE) act on abdominal ultrasonography use among medicare beneficiaries. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(19):1456–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Olchanski N, Winn A, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: the impact of the SAAAVE Act of 2007. Value Health. 2013;16(3):A211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chun KC, Teng KY, Van Spyk EN, Carson JG, Lee ES. PVSS4. Implementation of the screen for abdominal aortic aneurysms very efficiently (SAAAVE) Act: a five-year follow-up. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55(6):5S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Field ML, Sammut J, Kuduvalli M, Oo A, Rashid A. Hybrid theatres: nicety or necessity? J R Soc Med. 2009;102:92–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Kpodonu J. Hybrid cardiovascular suite: the operating room of the future. J Card Surg. 2010;25:704–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaneko T, Davidson MJ. Use of the hybrid operating room in cardiovascular medicine. Circulation. 2014;130:910–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Steffen K, Zorn GT, Tadros P, Gupta K. Role of hybrid endovascular suite in improving outcomes of surgical ligation of coronary artery fistula. J Invasive Cardiol. 2012;24:E10–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Marcassa C, Giordano A, Corrà U, Giannuzzi P. Greater functional improvement in patients with diabetes after rehabilitation following cardiac surgery. Diabet Med. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Drudi L, Lauck S, Kim D, Lefèvre T, Piazza N, Lachapelle K, Martucci G, Lamy A, Labinaz M, Peterson M, Arora R. Depression as a predictor of all-cause mortality in older adults undergoing transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32(10):S240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kaissi A. Manager-physician relationships: an organizational theory perspective. Health Care Manag. 2005;24(2):165–76.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Al-Sawai A. Leadership of healthcare professionals: where do we stand? Oman Med J. 2013;28(4):285.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Vlastarakos PV, Nikolopoulos TP. The interdisciplinary model of hospital administration: do health professionals and managers look at it in the same way? Eur J Pub Health. 2008;18(1):71–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Saultz JW, Lochner J. Interpersonal continuity of care and care outcomes: a critical review. Ann Fam Med. 2005;3(2):159–66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Cabana MD, Jee SH. Does continuity of care improve patient outcomes. J Fam Pract. 2004;53(12):974–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Van Durme T, Macq J, Anthierens S, et al. Stakeholders’ perception on the organization of chronic care: a SWOT analysis to draft avenues for health care reforms. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:179.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Supper I, Catala O, Lustman M, Chemla C, Bourgueil Y, Letrilliart L. Interprofessional collaboration in primary health care: a review of facilitators and barriers perceived by involved actors. [published online ahead of print December 18, 2014]. J Public Health (Oxf).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Henry TD, Sharkey SW, Burke MN, Chavez IJ, et al. A regional system to provide timely access to percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2007;116:721–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Whitley E, Pye P. Code Rupture, Establishing a protocol to expedite treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. CV Directions. 2(2):4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Harris KM, Strauss CE, Duval S, Unger BT, Kroshus TJ, Inampudi S, Cohen JD, Kapsner C, Boland LL, Eales F, Rohman E. Multidisciplinary standardized care for acute aortic dissection design and initial outcomes of a regional care model. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010;3(4):424–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. DesRoches CM, Charles D, Furukawa MF, Joshi MS, Kralovec P, Mostashari F, Worzala C, Jha AK. Adoption of electronic health records grows rapidly, but fewer than half of US hospitals had at least a basic system in 2012. Health Aff. 2013;9:10–377.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Desroches CM, Audet AM, Painter M, Donelan K. Meeting meaningful use criteria and managing patient populations: a national survey of practicing physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:791–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, et al. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2117–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Dimick JB, Stanley JC, Axelrod DA, et al. Variation in death rate after abdominal aortic aneurysmectomy in the United States: impact of hospital volume, gender, and age. Ann Surg. 2002;235:579–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Dueck AD, Kucey DS, Johnston KW, et al. Survival after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: effect of patient,surgeon, and hospital factors. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39:1253–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hill JS, McPhee JT, Messina LM, Ciocca RG, Eslami MH. Regionalization of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: evidence of a shift to high-volume centers in the endovascular era. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48(1):29–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. McPhee J, Eslami MH, Arous EJ, et al. Endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States (2001–2006): a significant survival benefit over open repair is independently associated with increased institutional volume. J Vasc Surg. 2009;49:817–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch HG, Wennberg DE. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(15):1128–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Reames BN, Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Hospital volume and operative mortality in the modern era. Ann Surg. 2014;260:244–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer CM. Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery. 2001;130:415–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Betensky RA, et al. The Leapfrog volume criteria may fall short in identifying high quality surgical centers. Ann Surg. 2003;238:447–455; discussion 455–457.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Barone JE, Tucker JB, Bull SM. The Leapfrog initiative: a potential threat to surgical education. Curr Surg. 2003;60:218–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Qian F, Lustik SJ, Diachun CA, et al. Association between Leapfrog safe practices score and hospital mortality in major surgery. Med Care. 2011;49:1082–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Allareddy V, Ward MM, Allareddy V, Konety BR. Effect of meeting Leapfrog volume thresholds on complication rates following complex surgical procedures. Ann Surg. 2010;251:377–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Contos B. Vascular centers of excellence—a tactical approach. Washington (DC): The Advisory Board Company; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Cronenwett JL, Kraiss LW, Cambria RP. The society for vascular surgery vascular quality initiative. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55(5):1529–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Douglas PS, Brindis RG. President’s page: a question of quality: why National Benchmarking? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(5):1076–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Coorevits P, Sundgren M, Klein GO, Bahr A, Claerhout B, Daniel C, Dugas M, Dupont D, Schmidt A, Singleton P, De Moor G. Electronic health records: new opportunities for clinical research. J Intern Med. 2013;274(6):547–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Weng C, Appelbaum P, Hripcsak G, et al. Using EHRs to integrate research with patient care: promises and challenges. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19:684–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Fenton JJ, Jerant AF, Bertakis KD, Franks P. The cost of satisfaction: a national study of patient satisfaction, health care utilization, expenditures, and mortality. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(5):405–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Schoenfelder T, Klewer J, Kugler J. Determinants of patient satisfaction: a study among 39 hospitals in an in-patient setting in Germany. Int J Qual Health Care. 2011;23:503–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. O’Brien MK, Petrie K, Raeburn J. Adherence to medication regimens: updating a complex medical issue. Med Care Res Rev. 1992;49:435–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Parchman ML, Burge SK. The patient-physician relationship, primary care attributes, and preventive services. Fam Med. 2004;36:22–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Kane RL, Maciejewsky M, Finch M. The relationship of patient satisfaction with care and clinical outcomes. Med Care. 1997;35:714–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. White A, Danis M. Enhancing patient-centered communication and collaboration by using the electronic health record in the examination room. JAMA. 2013;309(22):2327–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Kennedy GD, Tevis SE, Kent KC. Is there a relationship between patient satisfaction and favorable outcomes? Ann Surg. 2014;260(4):592.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. You LM, Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Liu K, He GP, Hu Y, Jiang XL, Li XH, Li XM, Liu HP, Shang SM. Hospital nursing, care quality, and patient satisfaction: cross-sectional surveys of nurses and patients in hospitals in China and Europe. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(2):154–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Kutney-Lee A, McHugh MD, Sloane DM, Cimiotti JP, Flynn L, Neff DF, Aiken LH. Nursing: a key to patient satisfaction. Health Aff. 2009;28(4):w669–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Kelley JM, Kraft-Todd G, Schapira L, Kossowsky J, Riess H. The influence of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e94207.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Rao B, Hellander I. The widening U.S. health care crisis three years after the passage of ‘Obamacare. Int J Health Serv. 2014;44:215–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. VanLare JM, Conway PH. Value-based purchasing—national programs to move from volume to value. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:292–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Gibson TB, Maclean RJ, Chernew ME, et al. Value-based insurance design: benefits beyond cost and utilization. Am J Manag Care. 2015;21:32–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Stecker EC, Riles EM, Fendrick AM. Value-based insurance design in cardiology: using “clinical nuance” to improve quality of care and contain costs. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1825–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. VanLare JM, Moody-Williams J, Conway PH. Value-based purchasing for hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:249; author reply 249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Abelson R. Trump signals shifting views of health law. The New York Times. 2016 Nov 12: A1.

    Google Scholar 

  86. US Department of Health and Human Services. Better, smarter, healthier: in historic announcement, HHS sets clear goals and timeline for shifting Medicare reimbursements from volume to value. Retrieved January. 2015 Jan 26;14:2016.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sanger Heart & Vascular Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Jocelyn K. Ballast, John R. Frederick & Frank R. Arko III

Authors
  1. Jocelyn K. Ballast
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John R. Frederick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Frank R. Arko III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Interventional Cardiology, Vascular and Endovascular Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA

    Robert S. Dieter

  2. Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Northwestern University at Cadence Health Emeritus, Winfield, IL, USA

    Raymond A. Dieter Jr.

  3. University of Tennessee Medical Center, Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Knoxville, TN, USA

    Raymond A. Dieter III

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ballast, J.K., Frederick, J.R., Arko, F.R. (2019). Multidisciplinary Aortic Centers. In: Dieter, R., Dieter Jr., R., Dieter III, R. (eds) Diseases of the Aorta . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11322-3_40

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11322-3_40

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11321-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11322-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation