Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 275

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Improvements in Door-to-Balloon Time in the United States, 2005 to 2010

Open access
Krumholz, Harlan M., Herrin, Jeph, Miller, Lauren E., Drye, Elizabeth E., Ling, Shari M., Han, Lein F., Rapp, Michael T., Bradley, Elizabeth H., Nallamothu, Brahmajee K., Nsa, Wato, Bratzler, Dale W., Curtis, Jeptha P.·2011·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: Registry studies have suggested improvements in door-to-balloon times, but a national assessment of the trends in door-to-balloon times is lacking. Moreover, we do not know whether improvements in door-to-balloon times were shared equally among patient and hospital groups. Methods and Results—: This analysis includes all patients reported by hospitals to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for inclusion in the time to percutaneous coronary intervention (acute myocardial infarction-8) inpatient measure from January 1, 2005, through September 30, 2010. For each calendar year, we summarized the characteristics of patients reported for the measure, including the number and percentage in each group, the median time to primary percutaneous coronary intervention, and the percentage with time to primary percutaneous coronary intervention within 75 minutes and within 90 minutes. Door-to-balloon time declined from a median of 96 minutes in the year ending December 31, 2005, to a median of 64 minutes in the 3 quarters ending September 30, 2010. There were corresponding increases in the percentage of patients who had times <90 minutes (44.2% to 91.4%) and <75 minutes (27.3% to 70.4%). The declines in median times were greatest among groups that had the highest median times during the first period: patients >75 years of age (median decline, 38 minutes), women (35 minutes), and blacks (42 minutes). Conclusion—: National progress has been achieved in the timeliness of treatment of patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.111.044107

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 275

Metadata

Authors
Krumholz, H. M., Herrin, J., Miller, L. E., Drye, E. E., Ling, S. M., Han, L. F., Rapp, M. T., Bradley, E. H., Nallamothu, B. K., Nsa, W., Bratzler, D. W., & Curtis, J. P.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2011-08-30
Volume
124
Issue
9
Pages
1038-1045
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W1992470234
Cited by
275
References
0
FWCI
22.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improvements in Door-to-Balloon Time in the United States, 2005 to 2010. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.111.044107
The paper
Krumholz, H. M., Herrin, J., Miller, L. E., Drye, E. E., Ling, S. M., Han, L. F., Rapp, M. T., Bradley, E. H., Nallamothu, B. K., Nsa, W., Bratzler, D. W., & Curtis, J. P. (2011). Improvements in Door-to-Balloon Time in the United States, 2005 to 2010. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.111.044107

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.