We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Article |

Impact of Peer Review in Reduction of Permanent Pacemaker Implantations

Atul B. Chokshi, MD; Howard S. Friedman, MD; Monte Malach, MD; Balendu C. Vasavada, MD; Sheldon J. Bleicher, MD
JAMA. 1981;246(7):754-757. doi:10.1001/jama.1981.03320070038021.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Because of a sharp increase in the number of permanent pacemakers inserted at The Brooklyn Hospital between 1972 and 1976, a peer-review committee was established to monitor subsequent pacemaker implantation. Total initial implants declined from 48 to 22 per year in the two years that followed. The number of implantations for sinoatrial bradycardias declined from 50 to 27 and the number of implantations for intraventricular conduction defects declined from 32 to five in the two years after peer review, compared with the two years before. There was no change in the number of pacemakers implanted for complete or advanced heart block. Almost 10% of patients who received a pacemaker between 1972 and 1976 had other conditions that might have accounted for the events that precipitated the decision to implant a pacemaker. The symptoms for which the pacemaker was implanted persisted in 19% of patients, despite a normally functioning pacemaker system. Patients receiving a permanent pacemaker before peer review had a 17% one-year and a 43% three-year mortality. When a more critical patient selection process was instituted, a smaller percentage remained symptomatic (9% vs 19%) and three-year survival rate was improved (86% vs 57%). From 1977 through 1978, when permanent pacemaker implantations declined, the number of hospital, medical service, and coronary care unit admissions increased. It is concluded that peer review can have substantial impact on permanent pacemaker implantations.

(JAMA 1981;246:754-757)


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.