Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients: Antithrombotic Trialists' Collaboration. British Medical Journal. 2002;324(7329):71-86.

The authors used collaborative meta-analyses (systematic overviews) to determine the effects of antiplatelet therapy among patients at high risk of occlusive vascular events. The main outcome measure was “serious vascular event," defined as non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or vascular death.

Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and recommendations of clinical experts: Treatments for myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1992;268(2):240-248.

The authors examine the temporal relationship between accumulating data from randomized control trials of treatments for AMI and the recommendations of clinical experts writing review articles and textbook chapters. Based on the results of a cumulative meta-analysis, they conclude that there are often discrepancies between the most current evidence of effective practice as derived from randomized trials and the recommendations of reviewers.

Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction). Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2004;44(3):671-719.

This is an update of an evidence-based guideline for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), originally issued by the ACC and AHA in 1999.

Wennberg JE. Variation in use of Medicare services among regions and selected academic medical centers: Is more better? Duncan W. Clark Lecture; New York Academy of Medicine. January 24, 2005.

Dr. John Wennberg is a noted expert on Medicare spending and practice variations. This article is adapted from a speech he gave to the New York Academy of Medicine and updates research on variations that are, according to Dr. Wennberg, unwarranted, because they cannot be explained by illness, patient preferences, or evidenced-based care.

Sahney VK. Managing implementation: The unanswered question. Frontiers of Health Service Management. 2004; 20(3):29-36.

In this article Sahney offers strategic advice on how to create a culture where quality is a core business strategy.

Reinertsen J. Zen and the art of physician autonomy maintenance. Annals of Internal Medicine. Apr 2004;140(7):585.

This letter recommends that the medical profession address issues of effective pratice, safety, and the art of medicine in relation to physician autonomy and patient-centered altruism.

Nielsen DM, Merry MD, Schyve PM, Bisognano M. Can the quality gurus' concepts cure healthcare? Quality Progress. Sep 2004;25-34.

Four prominent representatives of the movement for quality in healthcare describe the principles of Crosby, Deming, Feigenbaum, and Juran as they apply to health care.

Haraden C, Rutherford P. Redesign the clinic to enhance patient care. American Hospital Association News. Nov 2004.

Haraden and Rutherford consider the imperative for health care work redesign that incorporates streamlined and standardized clinical processes, enhanced teamwork, trusting staff, and designating tasks around teamworkers' strengths and professional skills.  Specific results from such reforms at two leading hospitals (Baptist Memorial Hospital in Memphis and Luther-Midelfort Hospital, Mayo Health System) are summarized.

Gosfield AG, Reinertsen JL. Paying physicians for high-quality care. New England Journal of Medicine. Apr 2004;350(18):1910.

Authors discuss challenges facing payment-for-performance initiatives.

Berwick DM. The improvement horse race: Bet on the UK. Quality and Safety in Health Care. Dec 2004;13(6):407-409.

Both the United States and the United Kingdom have problems with their health care systems, but each is going about solving their system deficiencies in their own manner.  If Dr. Berwick was a betting man, he would put his money on the UK finishing first.