In recent years, the hospital industry has been undergoing massive change and reorganization with technological innovations and the spread of managed care. As a result, the total number of hospitals countrywide has been declining, and a growing number of not-for-profit hospitals have converted to for-profit status. These changes raise two fundamental questions: What determines a hospital's choice of for-profit or not-for-profit organizational form? And how does that form affect patients and society?

This timely volume provides a factual basis for discussing for-profit versus not-for-profit ownership of hospitals and gives a first look at the evidence about new and important issues in the hospital industry. iThe Changing Hospital Industry: Comparing Not-for-Profit and For-Profit Institutions will have significant implications for public-policy reforms in this vital industry and will be of great interest to scholars in the fields of health economics, public finance, hospital organization, and management; and to health services researchers.

Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of death for both men and women in the United States. One of the most characteristic and troubling features of coronary disease is the sudden and unexpected onset of symptoms in clinically stable patients and sometimes in even previously healthy individuals.

The development of symptoms is associated with an increased risk of sudden death, acute myocardial infarction, and other life-threatening complications. The development of symptoms suggestive of coronary disease therefore mandates prompt and accurate diagnosis and treatment.

The cardinal symptom of coronary artery disease (CAD) is angina, which classically presents as a squeezing or strangulating deep chest discomfort that may radiate to the arm or jaw. Angina that is brought on by exercise stress and is relieved promptly after cessation of exertion is termed "typical angina." Stable angina is a pattern of symptoms that has been unchanged for 6 or more weeks. Unstable angina is a pattern of symptoms that is new in onset, changing in severity or frequency, occurring at rest, or lasting longer than 20 minutes.

The evaluation of suspected coronary disease is complicated by the fact that chest discomfort has many causes, and bona fide coronary disease may present in an atypical fashion. Thus, a population of patients with symptoms suggestive of coronary disease includes some patients with acute, life-threatening medical problems, some patients with other medical problems mimicking CAD, and even some "worried well" in need only of reassurance.

The evaluation and treatment of this highly heterogeneous population is the difficult task for clinicians in emergency departments (ED) and in office practice. The key goal of these clinicians must be to identify the patient's short-term risk. The high-risk patient may develop life-threatening complications and require hospitalization and immediate therapy. The low-risk patient may need further evaluation, but in a less urgent and less costly setting. Because identification of patient risk is central to all further patient management in unstable angina, this evidence report focuses on clinical and laboratory markers of patient risk, such as results of diagnostic tests (troponin values, stress testing, echocardiography, and nuclear scintigraphy).

Because chest pain units attempt to "risk stratify" (group patients according to their degree of risk) based on readily available data, an assessment of the efficacy of chest pain units is significant to this report. Our in-depth review focused on information that would be readily available to all providers caring for patients with suspected unstable angina. Information in this report applies to adult men and women.

In recent years, substantial efforts have been made to identify "best practices" and develop comprehensive practice guidelines for the treatment of various psychiatric disorders and medical conditions, based on systematic, often quantitative reviews of the existing intervention research. There probably are more than 300 comparative treatment trials that have been conducted in the alcohol field. With this large body of research, one might think the development of alcohol treatment guidelines would be a straightforward task. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Four problems are discussed with the "box-score" reviews that have been conducted thus far to identify effective alcohol treatment modalities. At least two of these problems are fundamental barriers to determining the relative efficacy or effectiveness of alcohol treatment modalities even in "meta-analyses" with "effect sizes". These impediments are discussed, as is how future alcohol treatment trials could be conducted so that their findings would more readily inform practice guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because there is wide variation in case-mix adjusted outcomes across dialysis facilities, it is possible that top-performing facilities use practices not shared by others. We sought to catalogue "best practices" that may account for interfacility variations in outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This multidisciplinary study identified candidate best practices in dialysis through a staged process, including systematic review, cognitive interviews, and a national "virtual focus group" of dialysis providers. The resulting candidate practices were rank-ordered by perceived importance as determined by mean RAND Appropriateness Scores from a national survey of nephrologists, nurses, and opinion leaders. RESULTS: A total of 155 candidate best practices were identified. Among these, respondents believed dialysis outcomes are most strongly related to 1) characteristics of multidisciplinary care conferences, 2) technician proficiency in protecting vascular access, 3) training of nurses to provide education in fluid management, vascular access, and nutrition, 4) use of random and blinded audits of staff performance, and 5) communication and teamwork among staff. In contrast, there was wide disagreement about the importance of facility-based health maintenance practices, optimal staffing ratios, frequency of dialysis-based physician visits, and optimal frequency of multidisciplinary care. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a "conceptual map" of candidate dialysis best practices and highlights areas of general agreement and disagreement. These findings can help the dialysis community think critically about what may define "best practice" and provide targets for future research in quality improvement.

BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking is a major risk factor for several chronic oxidative diseases that can be ameliorated by antioxidants.

OBJECTIVES: This study identified the typical dietary intakes and the major food group contributors of the antioxidants beta-carotene, vitamin C, and vitamin E by smoking status.

DESIGN: The 1994-1996 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) provided the current sample (n = 6749), who were categorized as non- (n = 3231), former (n = 1684), and current (n = 1834) smokers. In the CSFII, individuals' food intakes were estimated with two 24-h dietary recalls. Data were analyzed by using a chi-square test with a simultaneous Fisher's z test, analysis of variance with Scheffe's test, multivariate analysis of covariance, and analysis of covariance with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS: The sample consisted of 3707 men and 3042 women. Current smokers tended to be younger with less education and lower incomes than nonsmokers and former smokers. The average body mass index (in kg/m(2)) of current smokers was 25.8, the lowest of the 3 groups. Current smokers had the lowest dietary antioxidant intake. Fatty foods such as luncheon meats, condiments and salad dressings, and ground beef contributed more to the antioxidant intakes of current smokers than to those of the other 2 groups, whereas fruit and vegetables contributed less. Current smokers consumed the fewest numbers of servings of all nutrient-bearing groups in the food guide pyramid, except the meat group.

CONCLUSION: Future interventions should target the clustering of cigarette smoking and other unhealthy lifestyle habits, eg, an imprudent diet.