Search

OBJECTIVES: Contrary to advanced cardiac life support guidelines that recommend immediate defibrillation for shockable in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), epinephrine administration before first defibrillation is common and associated with lower survival at a "patient-level." Whether this practice varies across hospitals and its association with "hospital-level" IHCA survival remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine hospital variation in rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation for shockable IHCA and its association with IHCA survival. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Five hundred thirteen hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines Resuscitation Registry. PATIENTS: A total of 37,668 adult patients with IHCA due to an initial shockable rhythm from 2000 to 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Epinephrine before first defibrillation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using multivariable hierarchical regression, we examined hospital variation in epinephrine administration before first defibrillation and its association with hospital-level rates of risk-adjusted survival. The median hospital rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation was 18.8%, with large variation across sites (range, 0-68.8%; median odds ratio: 1.54; 95% CI, 1.47-1.61). Major teaching status and annual IHCA volume were associated with hospital rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation. Compared with hospitals with the lowest rate of epinephrine administration before defibrillation (Q1), there was a stepwise decline in risk-adjusted survival at hospitals with higher rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation (Q1: 44.3%, Q2: 43.4%; Q3: 41.9%; Q4: 40.3%; p for trend < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of epinephrine before defibrillation in shockable IHCA is common and varies markedly across U.S. hospitals. Hospital rates of epinephrine administration before defibrillation were associated with a significant stepwise decrease in hospital rates of risk-adjusted survival. Efforts to prioritize immediate defibrillation for patients with shockable IHCA and avoid early epinephrine administration are urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Quantifying guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) intensity is foundational for improving heart failure (HF) care. Existing measures discount dose intensity or use inconsistent weighting. METHODS: The Kansas City Medical Optimization (KCMO) score is the average of total daily to target dose percentages for eligible GDMT, reflecting the percentage of optimal GDMT prescribed (range, 0-100). In Change the Management of Patients With HF, we computed KCMO, HF collaboratory (0-7), and modified HF Collaboratory (0-100) scores for each patient at baseline and for 1-year change in established GDMT at the time (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, β-blocker, ACE [angiotensin-converting enzyme] inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor). We compared baseline and 1-year change distributions and the coefficient of variation (SD/mean) across scores. RESULTS: Among 4532 patients at baseline, mean KCMO, HF collaboratory, and modified HF Collaboratory scores were 38.8 (SD, 25.7), 3.4 (1.7), and 42.2 (22.2), respectively. The mean 1-year change (n=4061) for KCMO was -1.94 (17.8); HF collaborator, -0.11 (1.32); and modified HF Collaboratory, -1.35 (19.8). KCMO had the highest coefficient of variation (0.66), indicating greater variability around the mean than the HF collaboratory (0.49) and modified HF Collaboratory (0.53) scores, reflecting higher resolution of the variability in GDMT intensity across patients. CONCLUSIONS: KCMO measures GDMT intensity by incorporating dosing and treatment eligibility, provides more granularity than existing methods, is easily interpretable (percentage of ideal GDMT), and can be adapted as performance measures evolve. Further study of its association with outcomes and its usefulness for quality assessment and improvement is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Rubidium-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging provides measurements of perfusion, myocardial blood flow and reserve (MBFR), and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at rest and peak stress. Although all of these variables are known to provide prognostic information, they have not been well studied in patients with heart failure due to reduced LVEF. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2016, 1255 consecutive unique patients with LVEF≤40% were included in this study who underwent rubidium-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging and did not have subsequent revascularization within 90 days. Perfusion assessment was scored semiquantitatively, and LVEF reserve (stress-rest LVEF) and global MBFR (stress/rest MBF) were quantified using automated software. Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for 14 clinical and 7 test characteristics were used to define the independent prognostic significance of MBFR on all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of 1255 patients followed for a mean of 3.2 years, 454 (36.2%) died. After adjusting for clinical variables, the magnitude of fixed and reversible perfusion defects was prognostic of death (P=0.02 and 0.01, respectively), while the rest LVEF was not (P=0.18). The addition of LVEF reserve did not add any incremental value, while the addition of MBFR revealed incremental prognostic value (hazard ratio per 0.1 unit decrease in MBFR=1.08 [95% CI, 1.05–1.11], P<0.001) with fixed and reversible defects becoming nonsignificant (P=0.07 and 0.29, respectively). There was no interaction between MBFR and cause of cardiomyopathy (ischemic versus nonischemic). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a known cardiomyopathy who did not require early revascularization, reduced MBFR as obtained by positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging is associated with all-cause mortality while other positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging measures were not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Prompt initiation of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is critical to survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, the association between delays in bystander CPR and OHCA survival is poorly understood. METHODS: In this observational study using a nationally representative US registry, we identified patients who received bystander CPR from a layperson for a witnessed OHCA from 2013 to 2021. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to estimate the association between time to CPR (<1 minute versus 2–3, 4–5, 6–7, 8–9, and ≥10-minute intervals) and survival to hospital discharge and favorable neurological survival (survival to discharge with cerebral performance category of 1 or 2 [ie, without severe neurological disability]). RESULTS: Of 78 048 patients with a witnessed OHCA treated with bystander CPR, the mean age was 63.5±15.7 years and 25, 197 (32.3%) were women. The median time to bystander CPR was 2 (1–5) minutes, with 10% of patients having a≥10-minute delay before initiation of CPR. Overall, 15 000 (19.2%) patients survived to hospital discharge and 13 159 (16.9%) had favorable neurological survival. There was a graded inverse relationship between time to bystander CPR and survival to hospital discharge (P for trend <0.001). Compared with patients who received CPR within 1 minute, those with a time to CPR of 2 to 3 minutes were 9% less likely to survive to discharge (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.87–0.95]) and those with a time to CPR 4 to 5 minutes were 27% less likely to survive (adjusted odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.68–0.77]). A similar graded inverse relationship was found between time to bystander CPR and favorable neurological survival (P for trend <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with witnessed OHCA, there was a dose-response relationship between delays in bystander initiation of CPR and lower survival rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the type of an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event potentially influences patients' likelihood of smoking cessation. METHODS: Using 2013 to 2018 data from the US based National Cardiovascular Data Registry Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence outpatient cardiac registry, we identified patients who were current smokers at a clinic visit and followed them over time for a subsequent ASCVD event. Self-reported smoking status was assessed at each consecutive visit and used to determine smoking cessation after each interim ASCVD event (myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass graft, stroke/transient ischemic attack, peripheral artery disease). We constructed separate multivariable Cox models with nonproportional hazards to examine the association of each interim ASCVD event with smoking cessation, compared with not having an interim ASCVD event. We estimated the relative association of ASCVD event type with smoking cessation using contrast tests. Analyses were stratified by presence versus absence of ASCVD at baseline. RESULTS: Across 530 cardiology practices, we identified 1 933 283 current smokers (mean age 62±15, male 54%, ASCVD at baseline 50%). Among the 322 743 patients who had an interim ASCVD event and were still smoking, 41 336 (12.8%) quit smoking by their first subsequent clinic visit, which was higher among those with baseline ASCVD (13.4%) as compared with those without baseline ASCVD (11.5%). Each type of ASCVD event was associated with an increased likelihood of smoking. Patients who had an myocardial infarction, underwent coronary artery bypass graft (hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.55–1.65]), or had a stroke or transient ischemic attack were more likely to quit smoking as compared with those who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention or had a new diagnosis of peripheral artery disease (hazard ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.17–1.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Only 13% of patients reported smoking cessation after an ASCVD event, with the type of event being associated with the likelihood of smoking cessation, prompting the need for patient-centered interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What We Already Know About This Topic: Rapid response to witnessed, pulseless cardiac arrest is associated with increased survival.What This Article Tells Us That Is New: Assessment of witnessed, pulseless cardiac arrests occurring at 538 hospitals during a 9-yr period indicates that CPR did not occur immediately at 0 min in 5.7% of patients despite guidelines for instantaneous initiation. Delay in initiation of CPR was associated with significantly decreased survival.Time to initiation of CPR and subsequent time to initiation of administration of defibrillation shock (for shockable arrhythmias) and epinephrine were both associated with reduced patient survival.Background: Because the extent to which delays in initiating cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus the time from CPR to defibrillation or epinephrine treatment affects survival remains unknown, it was hypothesized that all three independently decrease survival in in-hospital cardiac arrest.Methods: Witnessed, index cases of cardiac arrest from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation Database occurring between 2000 and 2008 in 538 hospitals were included in this analysis. Multivariable risk-adjusted logistic regression examined the association of time to initiation of CPR and time from CPR to either epinephrine treatment or defibrillation with survival to discharge.Results: In the overall cohort of 57,312 patients, there were 9,802 survivors (17.1%). Times to initiation of CPR greater than 2 min were associated with a survival of 14.7% (91 of 618) as compared with 17.1% (9,711 of 56,694) if CPR was begun in 2 min or less (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.68 [0.54 to 0.87]; P < 0.002). Times from CPR to either defibrillation or epinephrine treatment of 2 min or less were associated with a survival of 18.0% (7,654 of 42,475), as compared with 15.0% (1,680 of 11,227) for 3 to 5 min (reference, 0 to 2 min; adjusted odds ratios [95% CI], 0.83 [0.78 to 0.88]; P < 0.001), 12.8% (382 of 2,983) for 6 to 8 min (0.67 [0.60 to 0.76], P < 0.001), and 13.7% (86 of 627) for 9 to 11 min (0.54 [0.42 to 0.69], P < 0.001).Conclusions: Delays in the initiation of CPR and from CPR to defibrillation or epinephrine treatment were each associated with lower survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Some studies suggest that female practitioners are more likely to provide guideline-concordant care than male practitioners; however, little is known about the role of practitioner gender in cardiology. Objective: The aim of the study was to measure the association between practitioner gender and adherence to the cardiovascular performance measures in the American College of Cardiology's ambulatory Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry. Methods: Patients with at least 1 outpatient visit with a unique practitioner were included. Among eligible patients, adherence to 7 guideline-supported performance measures for coronary artery disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation over 12 months after registry entry was compared by practitioner gender using hierarchical models adjusting for practitioner type (physicians vs advance practice practitioners) and number of visits. Results: The study cohort included 1493 individual practitioners who saw 769 139 patients; 80% of practitioners were men. Male practitioners were more often physicians compared with female practitioners (98.2% vs 43.7%, P < .01). Accounting for practitioner category and visit frequency, guideline adherence rates were similar by practitioner gender for all measures with the exception of marginally higher rates for coronary artery disease performance measures for male practitioners compared with female practitioners (antiplatelet: rate ratio [RR] = 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.09; "-blockers: RR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; and lipid-lowering drug: RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) and atrial fibrillation (oral anticoagulants: RR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). Conclusion: Male practitioners marginally outperformed their female counterparts in ambulatory practices enrolled in a voluntary cardiovascular performance improvement registry program. Overall low adherence to some performance measures suggests room for improvement among all practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In response to urban-rural disparities in healthcare resources, China recently launched a healthcare reform with a focus on improving rural care during the past decade. However, nationally representative studies comparing medical care and patient outcomes between urban and rural areas in China during this period are not available.Methods and Results: We created a nationally representative sample of patients in China admitted for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in 2001, 2006, and 2011, using a 2-stage random sampling design in 2 urban and 3 rural strata. In China, evidence-based treatments were provided less often in 2001 in rural hospitals, which had lower volume and less availability of advanced cardiac facilities. However, these differences diminished by 2011 for reperfusion therapy (54% in urban versus 57% in rural; P=0.1) and reversed for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (66% versus 68%; P=0.04) and early β-blockers (56% versus 60%; P=0.01). The risk-adjusted rate of in-hospital death or withdrawal from treatment was not significantly different between urban and rural hospitals in any study year, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.13 (0.77-1.65) in 2001, 0.99 (0.77-1.27) in 2006, and 0.94 (0.74-1.19) in 2011.Conclusions: Although urban-rural disparities in evidence-based treatment for myocardial infarction in China have largely been eliminated, substantial gaps in quality of care persist in both settings. In addition, urban hospitals providing more resource-intensive care did not achieve better outcomes.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01624883. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk treated with intensive blood pressure (BP) control (<120 mm Hg) had fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and deaths but higher rates of treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) than patients randomized to standard BP control (<140 mm Hg). However, the degree of benefit or harm for an individual patient could vary because of heterogeneity in treatment effect.Methods and Results: Using patient-level data from 9361 randomized patients in SPRINT, we developed models to predict risk for MACE or death and treatment-related SAE to allow for individualized BP treatment goals based on each patient's projected risk and benefit of intensive versus standard BP control. Models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling and externally validated on 4741 patients from the ACCORD-BP (The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes blood pressure) trial. Among 9361 SPRINT patients, 755 patients (8.1%) had a MACE or death event and 338 patients (3.6%) had a treatment-related SAE during a median follow-up of 3.3 years. The MACE/death and the SAE model had C statistics of 0.72 and 0.70, respectively, in the derivation cohort and 0.69 and 0.65 in ACCORD. The MACE/death model had 10 variables including treatment interactions with age, baseline systolic BP, and diastolic BP, and the SAE model had 8 variables including treatment interaction with number of BP medications. Intensive BP treatment was associated with a mean 2.2±2.6% lower risk of MACE/death compared with standard treatment (range, 20.7% lower risk to 19.6% greater risk among individual patients) and a mean 2.2±1.2% higher risk for SAEs (range, 0.5%-15.8% more harm in individual patients).Conclusions: To translate the findings from SPRINT to clinical practice, we developed prediction models to tailor the intensity of BP control based on the projected risk and benefit for each unique patient. This approach should be prospectively tested to better engage patients in shared medical decision making and to improve outcomes.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: For patients with in-hospital cardiac arrests attributable to nonshockable rhythms, delays in epinephrine administration beyond 5 minutes is associated with worse survival. However, the extent of hospital variation in delayed epinephrine administration and its effect on hospital-level outcomes is unknown.Methods: Within Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we identified 103 932 adult patients (≥18 years) at 548 hospitals with an in-hospital cardiac arrest attributable to a nonshockable rhythm who received at least 1 dose of epinephrine between 2000 and 2014. We constructed 2-level hierarchical regression models to quantify hospital variation in rates of delayed epinephrine administration (>5 minutes) and its association with hospital rates of survival to discharge and survival with functional recovery.Results: Overall, 13 213 (12.7%) patients had delays to epinephrine, and this rate varied markedly across hospitals (range, 0%-53.8%). The odds of delay in epinephrine administration were 58% higher at 1 randomly selected hospital in comparison with a similar patient at another randomly selected hospital (median odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-1.64). The median risk-standardized survival rate was 12.0% (range, 5.4%-31.9%), and the risk-standardized survival with functional recovery was 7.4% (range, 0.9%-30.8%). There was an inverse correlation between a hospital's rate of delayed epinephrine administration and its risk-standardized rate of survival to discharge (ρ=-0.22, P<0.0001) and survival with functional recovery (ρ=-0.14, P=0.001). In comparison with a median survival rate of 12.9% (interquartile range, 11.1%-15.4%) at hospitals in the lowest quartile of epinephrine delay, risk-standardized survival was 16% lower at hospitals in the quartile with the highest rate of epinephrine delays (10.8%; interquartile range, 9.7%-12.7%).Conclusions: Delays in epinephrine administration following in-hospital cardiac arrest are common and variy across hospitals. Hospitals with high rates of delayed epinephrine administration had lower rates of overall survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest attributable to nonshockable rhythm. Further studies are needed to determine whether improving hospital performance on time to epinephrine administration, especially at hospitals with poor performance on this metric, will lead to improved outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiac arrest is a major public health concern worldwide. The extent and types of randomized controlled trials (RCT)-our most reliable source of clinical evidence-conducted in these high-risk patients over recent years are largely unknown.Methods and Results: We performed a systematic review, identifying all RCTs published in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from 1995 to 2014 that focused on the acute treatment of nontraumatic cardiac arrest in adults. We then extracted data on the setting of study populations, types and timing of interventions studied, risk of bias, outcomes reported, and how these factors have changed over time. Over this 20-year period, 92 RCTs were published containing 64 309 patients (median, 225.5 per trial). Of these, 81 RCTs (88.0%) involved out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, whereas 4 (4.3%) involved in-hospital cardiac arrest and 7 (7.6%) included both. Eighteen RCTs (19.6%) were performed in the United States, 68 (73.9%) were performed outside the United States, and 6 (6.5%) were performed in both settings. Thirty-eight RCTs (41.3%) evaluated drug therapy, 39 (42.4%) evaluated device therapy, and 15 (16.3%) evaluated protocol improvements. Seventy-four RCTs (80.4%) examined interventions during the cardiac arrest, 15 (16.3%) examined post cardiac arrest treatment, and 3 (3.3%) studied both. Overall, reporting of the risk of bias was limited. The most common outcome reported was return of spontaneous circulation: 86 (93.5%) with only 22 (23.9%) reporting survival beyond 6 months. Fifty-three RCTs (57.6%) reported global ordinal outcomes, whereas 15 (16.3%) reported quality-of-life. RCTs in the past 5 years were more likely to be focused on protocol improvements and postcardiac arrest care.Conclusions: Important gaps in RCTs of cardiac arrest treatments exist, especially those examining in-hospital cardiac arrest, protocol improvement, postcardiac arrest care, and long-term or quality-of-life outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented that discusses the role of low-hanging fruit for prevention of Cardiometabolic Disease Policy. Topics discussed improving risk factor and pharmacological and technological advances in the management of coronary heart disease and stroke; increasing sugar intake in obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus prevalence; and mentions the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act on packaged foods.

Background: Most studies on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest have primarily focused on in-hospital or short-term survival. Little is known about long-term outcomes and resource use among survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Methods: In this observationsl study, we describe overall long-term outcomes for patients from the national Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival linked to Medicare files to create the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival: Mortality, Events, and Costs for Cardiac Arrest survivors dataset. Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival data between 2013 and 2019 were linked to Medicare data using probabilistic matching algorithms. Overall long-term mortality, readmissions, and index hospitalization costs are reported for the overall cohort.Results: Among 56 425 patients who were 65 years of age or older in Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival who survived to hospital admission, 26 875 (47.6%) were successfully linked to Medicare files. Mean (+SD) cost of the index hospitalization was $23 262+$24 199 and the median cost was $14 636 (interquartile range, $9930-$30 033). Overall, 8676 (32.3%) survived to hospital discharge with 38.0% discharged home, 11.8% to hospice care, and the remaining 50.2% to other inpatient, skilled nursing care, or rehabilitation facilities. Mortality after discharge was initially high (27.0% at 3 months) and then increased gradually, with 1- and 3-year mortality of 37.1% and 50.1%, respectively. During the first year, 40.1% were readmitted at least once, with 19.7% readmitted on > 1 occasion.Conclusions: The Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival: Mortality, Events, and Costs for Cardiac Arrest survivors registry includes rich data on postdischarge outcomes and resource utilization. Use of this dataset will enable future investigations on the long-term effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of various interventions for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in elderly patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a reported association between high clinical volume and improved outcomes. Whether this relationship is true for outpatients with coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF), and atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unknown.Methods and Results: Using the PINNACLE Registry (2009-2012), average monthly provider and practice volumes were calculated for CAD, HF, and AF. Adherence with 4 American Heart Association CAD, 2 HF, and 1 AF performance measure were assessed at the most recent encounter for each patient. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between provider and practice volume and performance on eligible quality measures. Data incorporated patients from 1094 providers at 71 practices (practice level analyses n=654 535; provider level analyses n=529 938). Median monthly provider volumes were 79 (interquartile range [IQR], 51-117) for CAD, 27 (16-45) for HF, and 37 (24-54) for AF. Median monthly practice volumes were 923 (IQR, 476-1455) for CAD, 311 (145-657) for HF, and 459 (185-720) for AF. Overall, 55% of patients met all CAD measures, 72% met all HF measures, and 58% met the AF measure. There was no definite relationship between practice volume and concordance for CAD, AF, or HF (P=0.56, 0.52, and 0.79, respectively). In contrast, higher provider volume was associated with increased concordance for CAD and AF performance measures (P<0.001 for both), but not for HF (P=0.36).Conclusions: In the PINNACLE registry, performance was modest and variable. Higher provider volume was positively associated with quality, whereas practice volume was not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2009, national legislation promoted wide-spread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) across US hospitals; however, the association of EHR use with quality of care and outcomes after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains unclear.Methods and Results: Data on EHR use were collected from the American Hospital Association Annual Surveys (2007-2010) and data on AMI care and outcomes from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Interventions Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines. Comparisons were made between patients treated at hospitals with fully implemented EHR (n=43 527), partially implemented EHR (n=72 029), and no EHR (n=9270). Overall EHR use increased from 82.1% (183/223) hospitals in 2007 to 99.3% (275/277) hospitals in 2010. Patients treated at hospitals with fully implemented EHRs had fewer heparin overdosing errors (45.7% versus 72.8%; P<0.01) and a higher likelihood of guideline-recommended care (adjusted odds ratio, 1.40 [confidence interval, 1.07-1.84]) compared with patients treated at hospitals with no EHR. In non-ST-segment-elevation AMI, fully implemented EHR use was associated with lower risk of major bleeding (adjusted odds ratio, 0.78 [confidence interval, 0.67-0.91]) and mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [confidence interval, 0.69-0.97]) compared with no EHR. In ST-segment-elevation MI, outcomes did not significantly differ by EHR status.Conclusions: EHR use has risen to high levels among hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. EHR use was associated with less frequent heparin overdosing and modestly greater adherence to acute MI guideline-recommended therapies. In non-ST-segment-elevation MI, slightly lower adjusted risk of major bleeding and mortality were seen in hospitals implemented with full EHRs; however, in ST-segment-elevation MI, differences in outcomes were not seen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--Although out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is common because of acute myocardial infarction, it is unknown whether early coronary angiography is associated with improved survival in these patients. Methods and Results--Using data from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES), we identified 4029 adult patients admitted to 374 hospitals after successful resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest because of ventricular fibrillation, pulseless ventricular tachycardia, or unknown shockable rhythm between January 2010 and December 2013. Early coronary angiography (occurring within one calendar day of cardiac arrest) was performed in 1953 (48.5%) patients, of whom 1253 (64.2%) received coronary revascularization. Patients who underwent early coronary angiography were younger (59.9 versus 62.0 years); more likely to be men (78.1% versus 64.3%), have a witnessed arrest (84.6% versus 77.4%), and have ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (32.7% versus 7.9%); and less likely to have known cardiovascular disease (22.8% versus 35.0%), diabetes mellitus (11.0% versus 17.0%), and renal disease (1.8% versus 5.8%; P<0.01 for all comparisons). In analysis of 1312 propensity score-matched pairs, early coronary angiography was associated with higher odds of survival to discharge (odds ratio 1.52 [95% confidence interval 1.28-1.80]; P<0.0001) and survival with favorable neurological outcome (odds ratio 1.47 [95% confidence interval 1.25-1.71]; P<0.0001). Further adjustment for coronary revascularization in our models significantly attenuated both odds ratios, suggesting that revascularization was a key mediator of the survival benefit. Conclusions--Among initial survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest caused by VF or pulseless VT, we found early coronary angiography was associated with higher odds of survival to discharge and favorable neurological outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although rapid response teams have been widely promoted as a strategy to reduce unexpected hospital deaths, most studies of rapid response teams have not adjusted for secular trends in mortality before their implementation. We examined whether implementation of a rapid response team was associated with a reduction in hospital mortality after accounting for preimplementation mortality trends.Methods: Among 56 hospitals in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation linked to Medicare, we calculated the annual rates of case mix-adjusted mortality for each hospital during 2000 to 2014. We constructed a hierarchical log-binomial regression model of mortality over time (calendar-year), incorporating terms to capture the effect of rapid response teams, to determine whether implementation of rapid response teams was associated with reduction in hospital mortality that was larger than expected based on preimplementation trends, while adjusting for hospital case mix index.Results: The median annual number of Medicare admissions was 5214 (range, 408-18 398). The median duration of preimplementation and postimplementation period was 7.6 years (≈2.5 million admissions) and 7.2 years (≈2.6 million admissions), respectively. Hospital mortality was decreasing by 2.7% annually during the preimplementation period. Implementation of rapid response teams was not associated with a change in mortality during the initial year (relative risk for model intercept, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.94-1.02]; P=0.30) or in the mortality trend (relative risk for model slope, 1.01 per year [95% CI, 0.99-1.02]; P=0.30). Among individual hospitals, implementation of a rapid response team was associated with a lower-than-expected mortality at only 4 (7.1%) and higher-than-expected mortality at 2 (3.7%) hospitals.Conclusions: Among a large and diverse sample of US hospitals, we did not find implementation of rapid response teams to be associated with reduction in hospital mortality. Studies are needed to understand best practices for rapid response team implementation, to ensure that hospital investment in these teams improves patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--Despite intensive efforts over many years, the United States has made limited progress in improving rates of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Recently, national organizations, such as the American Heart Association, have focused on promoting bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, use of automated external defibrillators, and other performance improvement efforts. Methods and Results--Using the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES), a prospective clinical registry, we identified 70 027 U.S. patients who experienced an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest between October 2005 and December 2012. Using multilevel Poisson regression, we examined temporal trends in risk-adjusted survival. After adjusting for patient and cardiac arrest characteristics, risk-adjusted rates of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival increased from 5.7% in the reference period of 2005 to 2006 to 7.2% in 2008 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.12--1.43; P<0.001). Survival improved more modestly to 8.3% in 2012 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.26--1.70; P<0.001). This improvement in survival occurred in both shockable and nonshockable arrest rhythms (P for interaction=0.22) and was also accompanied by better neurological outcomes among survivors (P for trend=0.01). Improved survival was attributable to both higher rates of prehospital survival, where risk-adjusted rates increased from 14.3% in 2005 to 2006 to 20.8% in 2012 (P for trend<0.001), and in-hospital survival (P for trend=0.015). Rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use modestly increased during the study period and partly accounted for prehospital survival trends. Conclusions--Data drawn from a large subset of U.S communities suggest that rates of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest have improved among sites participating in a performance improvement registry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although an in-hospital cardiac arrest is common, little is known about readmission patterns and an inpatient resource use among survivors of an in-hospital cardiac arrest.Methods and Results: Within a large national registry, we examined long-term inpatient use among 6972 adults aged ≥65 years who survived an in-hospital cardiac arrest. We examined 30-day and 1-year readmission rates and inpatient costs, overall and by patient demographics, hospital disposition (discharge destination), and neurological status at discharge. The mean age was 75.8±7.0 years, 56% were men, and 12% were black. There were a total of 2005 readmissions during the first 30 days (cumulative incidence rate, 35 readmissions/100 patients; 95% confidence interval, 33-37) and 8751 readmissions at 1 year (cumulative incidence rate, 185 readmissions/100 patients; 95% confidence interval, 177-190). Overall, mean inpatient costs were $7741±$2323 at 30 days and $18 629±$9411 at 1 year. Thirty-day inpatient costs were higher in patients of younger age (≥85 years, $6052 [reference]; 75-84 years, $7444 [adjusted cost ratio, 1.23; 1.06-1.42; 65-74 years, $8291 [adjusted cost ratio, 1.37; 1.19-1.59; both P<0.001) and black race (whites, $7413; blacks, $9044; adjusted cost ratio, 1.22; 1.05-1.42; P<0.001), as well as those discharged with severe neurological disability or to skilled nursing or rehabilitation facilities. These differences in resource use persisted at 1 year and were largely because of higher readmission rates.Conclusions: Survivors of an in-hospital cardiac arrest have frequent readmissions and high follow-up inpatient costs. Readmissions and inpatient costs were higher in certain subgroups, including patients of younger age and black race. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although studies have reported variation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival by geographic location, little is known about variation in OHCA survival at the level of emergency medical service (EMS) agencies-which may have modifiable practices, unlike counties and regions. We quantified the variation in OHCA survival across EMS agencies and explored whether variation in 2 specific EMS resuscitation practices were associated with survival to hospital admission.Methods: Within the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival, a prospective registry representing ≈51% of the US population, we identified 258 342 OHCAs from 764 EMS agencies with >10 OHCA cases annually during 2015 to 2019. Using hierarchical logistic regression, risk-standardized rates of survival to hospital admission were computed for each EMS agency. We quantified inter-agency variation in survival with median odds ratios and assessed the association of 2 resuscitation practices (EMS response time and the proportion of OHCAs with termination of resuscitation without meeting futility criteria) with EMS agency survival rates to hospital admission.Results: Across 764 EMS agencies comprising 258 342 OHCAs, the median risk-standardized rate of survival to hospital admission was 27.3% (interquartile range, 24.5%-30.1%; range: 16.0%-45.6%). The adjusted median odds ratio was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.32-1.39), denoting that the odds of survival of 2 patients with identical covariates varied by 35% at 2 randomly selected EMS agencies. EMS agencies in the lowest quartile of risk-standardized survival had longer EMS response times when compared with the highest quartile (12.0±3.4 versus 9.0±2.6 minutes; P<0.001), and a higher proportion of OHCAs with termination of resuscitation without meeting futility criteria (27.9±16.1% versus 18.9±11.4%; P<0.001).Conclusions: Survival after OHCA varies widely across EMS agencies. EMS response times and termination of resuscitation practices were associated with agency-level rates of survival to hospital admission, suggesting potentially modifiable practices which can improve OHCA survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is an anatomic measure of calcified atherosclerosis. Myocardial perfusion defects and reduced myocardial blood flow reserve (MBFR) are physiological measures of ischemia and coronary circulatory health. We aimed to assess the relative prognostic importance of MBFR, perfusion defects, and CACS in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Methods: A total of 5983 consecutive patients without known history of coronary artery disease or cardiomyopathy, who underwent a CACS and 82Rb positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging between 2010 and 2016, were followed for all-cause death (n=785) over median of 3 years. Prognostic value was assessed using multivariable Cox regression models, and incremental risk discrimination for imaging variables was evaluated by comparing model c-indices after adjusting for clinical risk factors (RF). Results: Mean age was 67.1 years, 60% were female, and 83% were symptomatic. CACS was 0 in 22%, abnormal perfusion in 19%, and MBFR <2 in 53.3%. When added to RF, the model with MBFR had the best fit (c=0.78, P <0.0001).> P =0.02). Adding CACS to a model with RF, perfusion, and MBFR did not provide incremental prognostic value (c=0.785 for both, P =0.16). CACS and MBFR both had independent prognostic value in patients with normal and abnormal myocardial perfusion imaging. Even among patients with CACS of 0, MBFR <2 was present in 37.8%, being associated with higher risk of death (hazard ratio per 0.1[down arrow], 1.10 [1.04-1.15]; P <0.001),> Conclusions: Use of anatomic testing such as CACS of 0 to avoid myocardial perfusion imaging in symptomatic patients could lead to missing microvascular dysfunction in 4 out of 10 patients, a finding associated with a high mortality risk. Higher CACS was independently associated with the risk of death but did not provide incremental prognostic value over positron emission tomography with MBFR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical trials and national performance measures increasingly mandate reporting patients' perspectives of their health status: their symptoms, function, and quality of life. Although the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) is a validated disease-specific health status instrument for coronary artery disease (CAD) with high test-retest reliability, predictive power, and responsiveness, its use in routine clinical practice has been limited, in part, by its length (19 items).Methods and Results: Using data from 10 408 patients with CAD from 5 multicenter registries, we derived and validated a shortened version of the SAQ (SAQ-7) among patients presenting with stable CAD, undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and after acute myocardial infarction. We examined the psychometric properties of the SAQ-7 as compared with the full SAQ. Seven items from the Physical Limitation, Angina Frequency, and Quality of Life domains were identified for the SAQ-7, with high levels of concordance (0.88-1.00) with each original SAQ domain. The SAQ-7 demonstrated good construct validity (compared with Canadian Cardiovascular Society class for angina), with a correlation of 0.62 and 0.38 for patients with stable CAD and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, respectively. It was highly reproducible in patients with stable CAD (intraclass correlation, ≥0.78) and exhibited excellent responsiveness in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (≥18 points in each SAQ domain). Finally, the SAQ-7 was predictive of 1-year mortality and readmission.Conclusions: To increase the feasibility of measuring patient-reported outcomes in patients with CAD, we developed and validated a shortened 7-item SAQ instrument for use in clinical trials and routine care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]