Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Comparison of the Risk between Physicians and the General Population
Table 3
The risk for an AMI between physician subgroups (conditional logistical regression analysis).
Variable
Number (%)†
Adjusted OR (95% CI)
Specialty
Internal medicine
26 (0.39)
1.09 (0.65–1.83)
Surgery
29 (0.65)
1.46 (0.88–2.42)
Obstetrics and gynecology
8 (0.36)
0.70 (0.32–1.53)
Pediatrics
6 (0.20)
0.67 (0.28–1.60)
Emergency medicine
0
—
Others
35 (0.32)
1.000
Age (years)
0–34
2 (0.06)
1.000
35–49
22 (0.15)
0.87 (0.20–3.78)
≥50
80 (0.78)
1.58 (0.37–6.77)
Gender
Male
104 (0.43)
—
Female
0
—
Comorbidity
DM
Yes
39 (1.72)
1.83 (1.19–2.81)
No
65 (0.25)
1.000
HTN
Yes
87 (1.31)
7.10 (4.05–12.45)
No
17 (0.08)
1.000
Hyperlipidemia
Yes
68 (1.13)
2.69 (1.75–4.15)
No
36 (0.16)
1.000
Geographical area
North
49 (0.37)
1.000
Central
19 (0.34)
0.86 (0.50–1.47)
South
33 (0.38)
1.01 (0.65–1.58)
East
3 (0.41)
1.09 (0.34–3.56)
Level of hospital employed in
Medical Center
9 (0.16)
0.42 (0.20–0.85)
Regional hospital
13 (0.20)
0.51 (0.28–0.95)
Local hospital
19 (0.51)
0.81 (0.48–1.38)
Local clinic
63 (0.51)
1.000
Adjusted by age, DM, HTN, hyperlipidemia, geographical area, and level of hospital employed in. AMI: acute myocardial infarction; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; DM: diabetes mellitus; HTN: hypertension. value < 0.05. †Number (%): AMI number of the subgroup physician (percentage of “AMI number of the subgroup physicians/all numbers of the subgroup physicians”).
