Search

Background: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) suggest benefits for the transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, transradial PCI may delay reperfusion, leading to its avoidance. We sought to quantify the delay in reperfusion from transradial PCI ("transradial delay") that would need to be introduced to offset the potential mortality benefit of transradial PCI, compared with transfemoral, observed in RCTs., Methods: We developed a decision-analytic model to compare transfemoral and transradial PCI in STEMI. Thirty-day mortality rates were estimated by pooling STEMI patients from 2 RCTs comparing transfemoral and transradial PCI. We projected the impact of transradial delay using estimates of the increase in mortality associated with door-to-balloon time delays. Sensitivity analyses were performed to understand the impact of uncertainty in assumptions., Results: In the base case, a transradial delay of 83.0 minutes was needed to offset the mortality benefit of transradial PCI. When the mortality benefit of transradial PCI was one-quarter that observed in RCTs, the delay associated with equivalent mortality was 20.9 minutes. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, transradial PCI was preferred over transfemoral PCI in 97.5% of simulations when transradial delay was 30 minutes and in 79.0% of simulations when delay was 60 minutes., Conclusions: A substantial transradial delay is required to eliminate even a fraction of the mortality benefit observed with transradial PCI in RCTs. Results were robust to changing multiple assumptions and have implications for operators reluctant to transition to transradial PCI in STEMI because of concern for delaying reperfusion., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provides public reporting on the quality of hospital care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Core Measures allow discretion in excluding patients because of relative contraindications to aspirin, β-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We describe trends in the proportion of patients with AMI with contraindications that could lead to discretionary exclusion from public reporting., Methods: We completed cross-sectional analyses of 3 nationally representative data cohorts of AMI admissions among Medicare patients in 1994-1995 (n = 170,928), 1998-1999 (n = 27,432), and 2000-2001 (n = 27,300) from the national Medicare quality improvement projects. Patients were categorized as ineligible (eg, transfer patients), automatically excluded (specified absolute medical contraindications), discretionarily excluded (potentially excluded based on relative contraindications), or "ideal" for treatment for each measure., Results: For 4 of 5 measures, the percentage of discretionarily excluded patients increased over the 3 periods (admission aspirin 15.8% to 16.9%, admission β-blocker 14.3% to 18.3%, discharge aspirin 10.3% to 12.3%, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors 2.8% to 3.9%; P < .001). Of patients potentially included in measures (those who were not ineligible or automatically excluded), the discretionarily excluded represented 25.5% to 69.2% in 2000-2001. Treatment rates among patients with discretionary exclusions also increased for 4 of 5 measures (all except angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors)., Conclusions: A sizeable and growing proportion of patients with AMI have relative contraindications to treatments that may result in discretionary exclusion from publicly reported quality measures. These patients represent a large population for which there is insufficient evidence as to whether measure exclusion or inclusion and treatment represents best care., (Copyright © 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients of low socioeconomic status (SES) have higher mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Little is known about the underlying mechanisms or the relationship between SES and rehospitalization after AMI., Methods: We analyzed data from the PREMIER observational study, which included 2142 patients hospitalized with AMI from 18 US hospitals. Socioeconomic status was measured by self-reported household income and education level. Sequential multivariable modeling assessed the relationship of socioeconomic factors with 1-year all-cause mortality and all-cause rehospitalization after adjustment for demographics, clinical factors, and quality-of-care measures., Results: Both household income and education level were associated with higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio 2.80, 95% CI 1.37-5.72, lowest to highest income group) and rehospitalization after AMI (hazard ratio 1.55, 95% CI 1.17-2.05). Patients with low SES had worse clinical status at admission and received poorer quality of care. In multivariable modeling, the relationship between household income and mortality was attenuated by adjustment for demographic and clinical factors (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.54-2.62), with a further small decrement in the hazard ratio after adjustment for quality of care. The relationship between income and rehospitalization was only partly attenuated by demographic and clinical factors (hazard ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.01-1.89) and was not influenced by adjustment for quality of care., Conclusions: Patients' baseline clinical status largely explained the relationship between SES and mortality, but not rehospitalization, among patients with AMI.

Background: Prior studies have reported conflicting findings concerning the association of socioeconomic status (SES), treatment, and outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical record data from a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with HF between March 1998 and April 1999 (n = 25,086) to assess the association of patient SES, treatment, and outcomes. Patients' SES was designated as lower, lower-middle, higher-middle, and higher using residential ZIP code characteristics. Patients were evaluated for left ventricular systolic function assessment, prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge, readmission within 1 year of discharge, and mortality within 30 days and 1 year of admission. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to assess the association of SES, quality of care, and outcomes adjusting for patient, physician, and hospital characteristics., Results: Lower SES patients (relative risk [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.96) were modestly less likely to have had a left ventricular systolic function assessment, but had a similar adjusted likelihood of being prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.11) compared with higher SES patients after multivariable adjustment. Socioeconomic status was not associated with 30-day mortality after multivariable adjustment, but lower SES patients had a higher risk of 1-year mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19) and readmission within 1 year of discharge (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.03-1.12) compared with higher SES patients., Conclusions: Socioeconomic status in patients hospitalized with HF was not strongly associated with quality of care or 30-day mortality. However, the increased risk of 1-year mortality and readmission among patients of lower SES suggest SES may influence outcomes after hospitalization for HF.

Background: The TIMI ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) score was developed and validated in a randomized controlled trial population. We sought to assess its accuracy in a community-based cohort of elderly patients hospitalized with STEMI., Methods: We evaluated the TIMI STEMI score in 47,882 patients aged > or = 65 years hospitalized with STEMI in US hospitals from 1994 to 1996. We assessed TIMI STEMI score discrimination and calibration for 30-day mortality and compared observed and published TIMI mortality rates., Results: The cohort's median TIMI score was 6 (25th-75th percentile 4, 8). Thirty-day mortality rates were higher among patients with higher TIMI scores (TIMI score 2: 4.4% vs TIMI score > 8: 35.6%, P < .0001 for trend). However, the TIMI score provided only modest discrimination (c = 0.67) and calibration (goodness-of-fit P < .0001). Mortality rates for TIMI scores differed between patients who did and did not receive reperfusion therapy (P < .0001 for TIMI score x reperfusion therapy interaction). Thirty-day mortality rates in the cohort were higher than published TIMI estimates (P = .001; eg, TIMI score 2: 4.4% cohort vs 2.2% published rate)., Conclusions: The TIMI score provided modest prognostic discrimination and calibration among elderly patients with STEMI. Our findings highlight the difficulties in applying risk scores developed in randomized controlled trial cohorts to elderly patients.

Background: Racial differences in reperfusion therapy use among patients hospitalized with myocardial infarction (MI) have been previously reported as national phenomenon. However, it is unclear whether racial differences in treatment vary by region., Methods: Using data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction-2 and -3, a cohort of patients hospitalized with MI in the United States between 1994 and 2000, we sought to determine whether racial differences in reperfusion therapy use varied by geographic region in patients eligible for reperfusion therapy with no clinical contraindications to treatment (n = 204 230)., Results: Black patients had lower crude rates of reperfusion therapy than white patients (66.5% vs 69.9%, -3.3% racial difference, 99% CI -4.4% to -2.2%) overall. However, racial differences in reperfusion therapy use varied by geographic region. Reperfusion therapy rates were similar for black patients and white patients in the Northeast (67.9% black vs 65.3% white, +2.7% racial difference, 99% CI -0.5% to 5.8%) and statistically comparable for patients in the Midwest (68.3% black vs 69.0% white, -0.7% racial difference, 99% CI -2.9% to 1.5%) and West (70.7% black vs 72.6% white, -1.9% racial difference, 99% CI -5.1% to 1.2%). Racial differences in reperfusion therapy use were greatest for patients hospitalized in the South (64.5% black vs 71.7% white, -7.1% racial difference, 99% CI -8.7% to -5.6%). Racial differences were reduced, but geographic variations in racial differences persisted after multivariable adjustment., Conclusions: Lower rates of reperfusion therapy use among black patients with MI do not reflect a national pattern of racial differences in treatment, but a practice pattern predominantly attributable to the South.

Background: Previous studies have demonstrated that women hospitalized for heart failure receive poorer quality of care and have worse outcomes than men. However, these studies were based upon selected patient populations and lacked quality of care measures., Methods: We used data from the National Heart Failure Project, a national sample of fee-for-service Medicare patients hospitalized with heart failure in the United States in 1998-1999, to evaluate differences in quality of care and patient outcomes between men and women. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models and chi2 analyses were used to examine sex differences in the documentation of left ventricular systolic function (LVSF), prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for patients with left ventricular dysfunction, and mortality within 30 days and 1 year of admission in the study cohort (n = 30,996)., Results: Women had lower overall rates of LVSF assessment than men (64.9% vs 69.5%, P < .001). Among patients classified as candidates for ACE inhibitor prescription, women had lower crude rates of ACE inhibitor prescription than men (70.1% vs 74.2%, P = .015), but treatment rates were similar when evaluating the prescription of ACE inhibitors or ARBs (78.9% women vs 81.3% men, P = .11). Despite lower rates of treatment, women had lower mortality rates than men at 30 days (9.2% vs 11.4%, P < .001) and 1 year (36.2% vs 43.0%, P < .001) after admission. Results were similar after multivariable adjustment., Conclusions: There were small sex differences in the quality of care provided to fee-for-service Medicare patients hospitalized with heart failure, although women had higher rates of survival than men up to 1 year after hospitalization.

Background: Studies have suggested that cardiologists may provide higher quality heart failure care than generalists. However, national rates of specialty care during hospitalization for heart failure and factors associated with care by a cardiologist are unknown., Methods: We assessed specialty care in a sample of Medicare patients hospitalized nationwide with heart failure between 1998 and 1999 (n = 25,869). Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models were used to identify factors independently associated with treatment by a cardiologist., Results: One-quarter (25.5%) of patients had a cardiologist as their attending physician, 31.3% of patients received a cardiology consult, and 43.2% of patients were not treated by a cardiologist during hospitalization. Older patients (age <75 years: referent; age 75-84 years: risk ratio [RR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98; age > or =85 years: RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88) and women (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.83-0.93) were less likely to have an attending cardiologist. Patients with a history of heart failure (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.20), coronary disease (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.14-1.32), coronary artery bypass grafting (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.32-1.42), or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.19-1.42) were more likely to be treated by a cardiologist, whereas patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.79) and dementia (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54-0.70) were less likely to be treated by a cardiologist. Patient race was not associated with treatment by a cardiologist. The strongest predictors of attending cardiology care were hospital factors, including large volume (>300 beds; RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.32-1.42) and geographic location (RR, 1.00 Northeast (referent) vs RR, 0.55; 95% CI 0.46-0.65 Midwest)., Conclusions: Slightly more than half of older patients with heart failure received care from a cardiologist. Several patient characteristics, including age and sex, were associated with the use of specialty care, suggesting that factors other than clinical presentation may independently influence the use of specialty care.

Background: Although it is widely accepted that clinical trials in heart failure may not apply to older populations, the magnitude of the discrepancy between trial populations and patients seen in community-based practice are not known. Our objective was to determine the proportion of older persons meeting enrollment criteria of randomized controlled trials of agents that prolong life in heart failure., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries >64 years old with the principal diagnosis of heart failure who were discharged from acute care hospitals in the United States between April 1998 and March 1999. Enrollment criteria of the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD), Metroprolol CR/LX Randomized Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF), and Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) trials were applied to the population, and the proportions meeting the criteria were determined by subgroups of age and sex., Results: Of the 20,388 patients studied, 18%, 13%, and 25% met the enrollment criteria of the SOLVD, MERIT-HF, and RALES trials, respectively. Although trial eligibility was less than a third for any sex or age group, significantly fewer women than men met trial criteria (13% vs 23% for SOLVD, 11% vs 17% for MERIT-HF, and 21% vs 32% for RALES, P <.0001 for all). The oldest patients were also less likely to fulfill enrollment criteria. The proportion of all patients not included because of preserved left ventricular systolic function was twice as large as the proportion meeting the inclusion criteria for any trial., Conclusions: A minority of hospitalized older persons with heart failure fit the profile of populations of clinical trials. There is an urgent need for research in heart failure for typical heart failure patients, including the very old, women, and patients with preserved left ventricular systolic function.

Background: Previous studies have reported that myocardial infarction (MI) treatment in New England differs from that of other regions of the United States. We sought to determine whether regional differences in MI treatment were independent of regional differences in patient, hospital, or physician characteristics, and whether the New England region's practice pattern was associated with better outcomes than those of patients in other regions., Methods: We evaluated 167,180 patients aged > or =65 years who were hospitalized with MI between 1994 to 1996 to assess regional variations in quality of care. Patients were evaluated for the use of reperfusion therapy, aspirin, and beta-blockers on admission and 30-day mortality rate. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to determine whether practice patterns specific to New England were independent of regional variations in patient, physician, hospital, or other geographic characteristics., Results: New England had the highest use of beta-blockers (72% vs 52% other regions, P <.001), and aspirin (80% vs 76% other regions, P <.001), a lower use of reperfusion therapy (61% vs 67% other regions, P <.001), and the lowest risk-standardized 30-day mortality rate (15% vs 19% other regions, P <.001). These differences persisted after adjusting for patient, physician, and hospital characteristics., Conclusions: Patients with MI in New England have higher rates of medical therapy use and lower 30-day mortality rates than patients in other US regions. This pattern is independent of patient or provider characteristics, suggesting other factors likely contribute to better short-term outcomes in New England.

Background: Prior studies have reported race and sex differences in cardiac catheterization use after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). It is unclear whether race or sex differences in procedure refusal may contribute to this difference. We sought to determine whether cardiac catheterization refusal rates differ by patient race or sex., Methods: We evaluated medical records of 74,745 Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for AMI between January 1994 and February 1996 to ascertain refusal of cardiac catheterization during hospitalization. Patient race and sex were evaluated for their association with cardiac catheterization refusal adjusting for patient, physician, and hospital characteristics., Results: The cardiac catheterization refusal rate in the overall cohort was 2.92% (95% CI 2.80%-3.04%). Race and sex differences in cardiac catheterization were observed after multivariate adjustment, with white women (odds ratio [OR] 1.28), black men (OR 1.34), and black women (OR 1.37) more likely to refuse cardiac catheterization than white men (OR 1.00). Relative differences in refusal were associated with only modest absolute differences in risk-standardized rates of cardiac catheterization refusal; rates were lowest for white men (2.55%), and higher for white women (3.21%), black men (3.36%), and black women (3.38%, P <.001 for global comparison)., Conclusions: Patient race and sex were associated with cardiac catheterization refusal among elderly patients hospitalized with AMI. However, absolute race and sex differences in rates of procedure refusal were small, suggesting that race and sex differences in cardiac catheterization refusal provide only a partial explanation of observed differences in cardiac procedure use.

Background: Amiodarone has been shown to be safe in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who are at risk for sudden cardiac death. However, there is limited data concerning the safety of amiodarone in patients who experience AMI complicated by atrial fibrillation., Methods: To determine the safety of amiodarone therapy, we conducted a retrospective analysis of elderly patients hospitalized with AMI who experienced atrial fibrillation and had survived to hospital discharge (n = 17,597). Amiodarone prescribed at discharge was evaluated for its association with short-term and long-term mortality in crude and adjusted analyses employing propensity score methods., Results: Of the 17,597 patients, 550 patients (3.1%) were prescribed amiodarone, 2317 patients (13.2%) were prescribed other antiarrhythmic agents (excluded from analysis), and 14,730 (83.7%) were prescribed no antiarrhythmic medication at discharge. Thirty-day mortality rates were similar for patients prescribed amiodarone and those not prescribed amiodarone (6.8% amiodarone vs 5.4% no amiodarone, P =.21), but mortality at 1 year was higher among patients prescribed amiodarone (35.6% vs 31.6%, P =.001). However, amiodarone was not associated with mortality at 30 days (odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.53-1.20) or at long-term follow-up (mean duration 612 days, hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.92-1.18) after multivariable modeling., Conclusions: Amiodarone was not independently associated with short-term or long-term mortality in elderly patients discharged after a hospitalization for AMI complicated by atrial fibrillation. Although our data suggest that amiodarone may be safe to use in this population, randomized controlled trial data are needed to confirm this finding.