Search

Evidence-based guidelines recommend cardiac rehabilitation(CR) for secondary prevention of recurrent myocardial infarction(re-MI) and risk factor management, but poor referral and completion rates persist. Regular audit can measure the effectiveness of services. A 2011 audit of public CR services, by the South Australian Department of Health CR Clinical Network showed a 12% program attendance rate. Following development of standardised minimum data and uniform electronic data capture, 24 CR services have contributed within 3 audits. We aimed to link referral and attendance with administrative data to assess characteristics and outcomes of eligible patients. Methods: The CR patient database for 2013-2015 was linked to patients discharged alive with a primary cardiac-related diagnosis and/or interventional procedure, identified through public hospital administrative data. Outcomes were defined as readmission for cardiovascular causes and death captured through the Births Deaths and Marriages database. Patient categories were not referred, referred/declined and attended CR. Associations with cardiovascular readmission and composites of death, new/re-MI, heart failure, atrial fibrillation and stroke over the 12-month follow-up duration were reported using inverse probability weighted survival methods among those who attended and those referred/declined. Results: Of 49,909 eligible cardiac separations, referral rate was 15,089/49,909 (30.2%) and attendance 4,286/15,089 (28.4%). Those referred/declined were older (median: 67.3 vs 65.3 years, P< 0.001), more likely to be female (32.3% vs 26.5%, P< 0.001) with more heart failure (17.1% vs 10.9%, P< 0.001) and arrhythmia (6.1% v 2.1%, P< 0.001) admissions, ≥2 comorbidities (35.3% v 23.3%, P< 0.001), with higher socio-economic disadvantage (median IRSAD: 950.1 vs 960.4, p<0.001). Attending patients had lower cardiovascular readmission, (attended vs not referred: 27.3% vs 34.5% and attended vs referred/declined ; 27.3% vs 41.4%, P< 0.001). After clinical and social factors adjustment there was no difference in composite clinical outcomes to 12-months, but attendance was associated with reduced cardiovascular readmission (HR:0.68, 95% IQR: 0.58-0.81, P = 0.001). Conclusions: This analysis highlights the complexity of factors that influence referral, non-attendance and attendance to CR. Conducting clinical audit and reporting to services is vital for measuring program effectiveness and can be a mechanism for service improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies of chronic diseases are associated with a financial burden on households. We aimed to determine if survivors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) experience household economic burden and to quantify any potential burden by examining level of economic hardship and factors associated with hardship. Methods: Australian patients admitted to hospital with ACS during 2-week period in May 2012, enrolled in SNAPSHOT ACS audit and who were alive at 18 months after index admission were followed-up via telephone/paper survey. Regression models were used to explore factors related to out-of-pocket expenses and economic hardship. Results: Of 1833 eligible patients at baseline, 180 died within 18 months, and 702 patients completed the survey. Mean out-of-pocket expenditure (n = 614) in Australian dollars was A$258.06 (median: A$126.50) per month. The average spending for medical services was A$120.18 (SD: A$310.35) and medications was A$66.25 (SD: A$80.78). In total, 350 (51 %) of patients reported experiencing economic hardship, 78 (12 %) were unable to pay for medical services and 81 (12 %) could not pay for medication. Younger age (18-59 vs =80 years (OR): 1.89), no private health insurance (OR: 2.04), pensioner concession card (OR: 1.80), residing in more disadvantaged area (group 1 vs 5 (OR): 1.77), history of CVD (OR: 1.47) and higher out-of-pocket expenses (group 4 vs 1 (OR): 4.57) were more likely to experience hardship. Conclusion: Subgroups of ACS patients are experiencing considerable economic burden in Australia. These findings provide important considerations for future policy development in terms of the cost of recommended management for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]