Utilisation of outpatient cardiac rehabilitation in Queensland

Objectives: To determine patient participation rates in outpatient cardiac rehabilitation (OCR) programs; ascertain the barriers to participation; and evaluate the quality of OCR programs. Design and setting: Retrospective cohort study of patient separations from selected public and private Queensland hospitals; questionnaire survey of hospitals and all registered OCR programs. Participants: Patients discharged with cardiac diagnoses between 1 July 1999 and 30 June 2000 from 31 hospitals (24 public; 7 private). Main outcome measures: Rates of referral of hospitalised patients to OCR programs; rates of program attendance and completion; barriers to OCR referral and attendance. Results: 15186 patients were discharged with cardiac diagnoses from participating hospitals, of whom 4346 (29%) were referred to an OCR program after discharge, compared with an estimated 59% (8895/15 186) of patients who were eligible for such a program. Proportionately more patients were referred from secondary (38% [1720/4500]) and private (52% [2116/4031]; P < 0.001) hospitals than from tertiary (25% [2626/10 686]) and public (20% [2230/11 155]) hospitals. Patients undergoing coronary revascularisation procedures comprised 35% of discharges, but accounted for 56% of all program attendances. Fewer than a third of all referred patients completed OCR programs, and only 39% of available OCR program places were fully utilised. Catchment populations of programs with unused places had excess coronary mortality. Conclusion: There is significant underutilisation of facility-based OCR programs in Queensland. Procedures are required for identifying and referring eligible patients to existing programs and improving program compliance. Alternative OCR models are also required.

Public investment and the risk premium for equity

Analysis of the equity premium puzzle has focused on private-sector capital markets. However, the existence of an anomalous equity premium raises important issues in the evaluation of public-sector investment projects. These issues are explored below. We begin by formalizing the argument that an equity premium may arise from uninsurable systematic risk in labour income, and show that, other things being equal, increases in public ownership of equity will improve welfare, up to the point where the equity premium is eliminated. Finally, we consider policy implications and the optimal extent of public ownership.