Search

Background Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes ( ACS) advocate for maintaining adequate long-term glycaemic control in diabetic patients. Glycosylated haemoglobin ( HbA1c) measurement is commonly used to monitor long-term glycaemic control in diabetes. Aims To evaluate the frequency and clinical predictors of in-hospital HbA1c measurement in diabetic patients presenting with ACS and the relationship between HbA1c assessment and mortality following discharge. Methods This registry-based cohort study included 1743 diabetic patients from 33 representative hospitals across Australia with a final diagnosis of ACS. Independent predictors of HbA1c assessment were evaluated using a multivariable logistic generalised estimating equations analysis. The association between HbA1c assessment and mortality following discharge was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard analysis. Results Seven hundred and fourteen (41%) patients had HbA1c assessment during admission. Frequency of assessment varied markedly between hospitals (7.7-87.6%). HbA1c assessment was significantly more frequent in hospitals with catheterisation laboratories. Frequency of assessment was not associated with location of hospital (rural vs urban) or hospital capacity. Independent clinical predictors of HbA1c assessment across participating hospitals were younger age, ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction, cardiac catheterisation and coronary artery bypass surgery during admission. HbA1c assessment was associated with higher rates of coronary catheterisation, revascularisation and receipt of evidence-based medicines but not with mortality during 6 months following discharge (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-1.18). Conclusion Frequency of HbA1c assessment varies markedly between hospitals, and most diabetic patients admitted for ACS in Australia do not receive assessment of pre-admission glycaemic control. HbA1c assessment was associated with better evidence driven medical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims We aimed to assess differences in patient management, and outcomes, of Australian and New Zealand patients admitted with a suspected or confirmed acute coronary syndrome ( ACS). Methods We used comprehensive data from the binational Australia and New Zealand ACS ' SNAPSHOT' audit, acquired on individual patients admitted between 00.00 h on 14 May 2012 to 24.00 h on 27 May 2012. Results There were 4387 patient admissions, 3381 (77%) in Australia and 1006 (23%) in New Zealand; Australian patients were slightly younger (67 vs 69 years, P = 0.0044). Of the 2356 patients with confirmed ACS, Australian patients were at a lower cardiovascular risk with a lower median Global Registry Acute Coronary Events score (147 vs 154 P = 0.0008), but as likely to receive an invasive coronary angiogram (58% vs 54%, P = 0.082), or revascularisation with percutaneous coronary intervention (32% vs 31%, P = 0.92) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (7.0% vs 5.6%, P = 0.32). Of the 1937 non-segment elevation myocardial infarction/unstable angina pectoris ( NSTEMI/ UAP) patients, Australian patients had a shorter time to angiography (46 h vs 67 h, P < 0.0001). However, at discharge, Australian NSTEMI/ UAP survivors were less likely to receive aspirin (84% vs 89%, P = 0.0079, a second anti-platelet agent (57% vs 63%, P = 0.050) or a beta blocker (67% vs 77%, P = 0.0002). In-hospital death rates were not different (2.7% vs 3.2%, P = 0.55) between Australia and New Zealand. Conclusions Overall more similarities were seen, than differences, in the management of suspected or confirmed ACS patients between Australia and New Zealand. However, in several management areas, both countries could improve the service delivery to this high-risk patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiovascular observational registries characterise patients and describe the manner and use of therapeutic strategies. They facilitate analyses on the quality of care among participating institutions and document variations in clinical practice which can be benchmarked against best practice recommendations. The Cooperative National Registry of Acute Coronary care, Guideline Adherence and Clinical Events (CONCORDANCE) is an Australian observational registry that describes management and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and feeds back both performance and outcome measures to participating hospitals. Methods: The CONCORDANCE registry has been designed within a comparative effectiveness research (CER) framework to collect and report data from hospitals located in geographically diverse regions of Australia. Information including patient demographics, presenting characteristics, past medical history, in-hospital management and outcomes at six months and two years are entered into a web-based database using an electronic clinical record form (eCRF). Individual hospital information is returned to the sites in a real time confidential report detailing information on key performance indicator (KPI) process measures and outcomes benchmarked against the aggregated study cohort. Governance rules ensure data security and protect patient and clinician confidentiality. Consistent with a CER framework, additional characteristics of the registry include: (a) the capacity to evaluate associations between the inter and intra hospital systems and the provision of evidence based care and outcomes, (b) ongoing data collection from representative hospitals which allow spatial and temporal analysis of change in practice and the application of treatment modalities in the real world setting and (c) the provision of a data spine for quality improvement strategies and practical clinical trials. Conclusion: The CONCORDANCE registry is a clinician-driven initiative describing clinical care for ACS patients admitted to Australian hospitals. The registry generates high quality data which is fed back to clinicians, and key stakeholders in ACS care. Using a CER approach, the registry describes the translation of randomised trial evidence into practice, and provides insights into strategies that could improve care and ultimately patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess long term survival and patient characteristics associated with survival following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Australia and New Zealand., Design: Cohort study., Setting, Participants: All patients admitted with AMI (ICD-10-AM codes I21.0-I21.4) to all public and most private hospitals in Australia and New Zealand during 2009-2015., Main Outcome Measure: All-cause mortality up to seven years after an AMI., Results: 239 402 initial admissions with AMI were identified; the mean age of the patients was 69.3 years (SD, 14.3 years), 154 287 were men (64.5%), and 64 335 had ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI; 26.9%). 7-year survival after AMI was 62.3% (STEMI, 70.8%; non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI], 59.2%); survival exceeded 85% for people under 65 years of age, but was 17.4% for those aged 85 years or more. 120 155 patients (50.2%) underwent revascularisation (STEMI, 72.2%; NSTEMI, 42.1%); 7-year survival exceeded 80% for patients in each group who underwent revascularisation, and was lower than 45% for those who did not. Being older (85 years or older v 18-54 years: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 10.6; 95% CI, 10.1-11.1) or a woman (aHR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.13-1.17) were each associated with greater long term mortality during the study period, as was prior heart failure (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.76-1.83). Several non-cardiac conditions and geriatric syndromes common in these patients were independently associated with lower long term survival, including major and metastatic cancer, cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease, and dementia., Conclusion: AMI care in Australia and New Zealand is associated with high rates of long term survival; 7-year rates exceed 80% for patients under 65 years of age and for those who undergo revascularisation. Efforts to further improve survival should target patients with NSTEMI, who are often older and have several comorbid conditions, for whom revascularisation rates are low and survival after AMI poor., (© 2021 AMPCo Pty Ltd.)

Introduction: Despite global concerns about the safety and quality of health care, population-wide studies of hospital outcomes are uncommon. The SAFety, Effectiveness of care and Resource use among Australian Hospitals (SAFER Hospitals) study seeks to estimate the incidence of serious adverse events, mortality, unplanned rehospitalisations and direct costs following hospital encounters using nationwide data, and to assess the variation and trends in these outcomes., Methods and Analysis: SAFER Hospitals is a cohort study with retrospective and prospective components. The retrospective component uses data from 2012 to 2018 on all hospitalised patients age ≥18 years included in each State and Territories' Admitted Patient Collections. These routinely collected datasets record every hospital encounter from all public and most private hospitals using a standardised set of variables including patient demographics, primary and secondary diagnoses, procedures and patient status at discharge. The study outcomes are deaths, adverse events, readmissions and emergency care visits. Hospitalisation data will be linked to subsequent hospitalisations and each region's Emergency Department Data Collections and Death Registries to assess readmissions, emergency care encounters and deaths after discharge. Direct hospital costs associated with adverse outcomes will be estimated using data from the National Cost Data Collection. Variation in these outcomes among hospitals will be assessed adjusting for differences in hospitals' case-mix. The prospective component of the study will evaluate the temporal change in outcomes every 4 years from 2019 until 2030., Ethics and Dissemination: Human Research Ethics Committees of the respective Australian states and territories provided ethical approval to conduct this study. A waiver of informed consent was granted for the use of de-identified patient data. Study findings will be disseminated via presentations at conferences and publications in peer-reviewed journals., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Increased access to reperfusion for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has contributed to reduced mortality internationally. We describe temporal trends in pre-hospital care, in-hospital management and outcomes of the STEMI population in Australia., Methods: Temporal trends with multiple regression analysis on the management and outcomes of STEMI patients enrolled across 46 Australian hospitals in the Australian cohort of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) and the Cooperative National Registry of Acute Coronary Care Guideline Adherence and Clinical Events (CONCORDANCE) between February 1999 and August 2016., Results: 4,110 patients were treated for STEMI, mean age 62.5±13.7years (SD). The median door-to-balloon time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) decreased by 11minutes (p<0.01) although there was no increase in rates of PPCI (p=0.35). Access to non-primary PCI increased by 39% (p<0.01), provisioning of fibrinolysis decreased by 13% (p<0.01) and the median door-to-needle time of 35minutes remained unchanged (p=0.09). Prescription of medical therapies in-hospital remained high, and at discharge there was an increase in prescription of statins (p<0.01); aspirin including antiplatelets (p<0.01), beta blockers (p=0.023) and ACE/ARB (p=0.02). The occurrence of any in-hospital adverse clinical events declined by 78% (p<0.01) albeit, there was no reduction in mortality in-hospital (p=0.84) or within 6 months (p=0.81)., Conclusions: Over time, there has been increased access to non-primary PCI; shorter door-to-balloon times for PPCI; less adverse events in-hospital and fewer readmissions for unplanned revascularisation without the realisation of reduced mortality in-hospital or at 6 months., Trial Registration: CONCORDANCE Registry ACTRN: 12614000887673., (Copyright © 2018 Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ). All rights reserved.)

Objective Effective translation of evidence to practice may depend on systems of care characteristics within the health service. The present study evaluated associations between hospital expertise and infrastructure capacity and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care as part of the SNAPSHOT ACS registry. Methods A survey collected hospital systems and process data and our analysis developed a score to assess hospital infrastructure and expertise capacity. Patient-level data from a registry of 4387 suspected ACS patients enrolled over a 2-week period were used and associations with guideline care and in-hospital and 6-, 12- and 18-month outcomes were measured. Results Of 375 participating hospitals, 348 (92.8%) were included in the analysis. Higher expertise was associated with increased coronary angiograms (440/1329; 33.1%), 580/1656 (35.0%) and 609/1402 (43.4%) for low, intermediate and high expertise capacity respectively; P<0.001) and the prescription of guideline therapies observed a tendency for an association with (531/1329 (40.0%), 733/1656 (44.3%) and 603/1402 (43.0%) for low, intermediate and high expertise capacity respectively; P=0.056), but not rehabilitation (474/1329 (35.7%), 603/1656 (36.4%) and 535/1402 (38.2%) for low, intermediate and high expertise capacity respectively; P=0.377). Higher expertise capacity was associated with a lower incidence of major adverse events (152/1329 (11.4%), 142/1656 (8.6%) and 149/149 (10.6%) for low, intermediate and high expertise capacity respectively; P=0.026), as well as adjusted mortality within 18 months (low vs intermediate expertise capacity: odds ratio (OR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-1.08, P=0.153; intermediate vs high expertise capacity: OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86, P=0.003). Conclusions Both higher-level expertise in decision making and infrastructure capacity are associated with improved evidence translation and survival over 18 months of an ACS event and have clear healthcare design and policy implications. What is known about the topic? There are comprehensive guidelines for treating ACS patients, but Australia and New Zealand registry data reveal substantial gaps in delivery of best practice care across metropolitan, regional, rural and remote health services, raising questions of equity of access and outcome. Greater mortality and morbidity gains can be achieved by increasing the application of current evidence-based therapies than by developing new therapy innovations. Health service system characteristics may be barriers or enablers to the delivery of best practice care and need to be identified and evaluated for correlations with performance indicators and outcomes in order to improve health service design. What does this paper add? This study measures two system characteristics, namely expertise and infrastructure, evaluating the relationship with ACS guideline application and clinical outcomes in a large and diverse cohort of Australian and New Zealand hospitals. The study identifies decision-making expertise and infrastructure capacity, to a lesser degree, as enabling characteristics to help improve patient outcomes. What are the implications for practitioners? In the design of health services to improve access and equity, expertise must be preserved. However, it is difficult to have experienced personnel at the bedside no matter where the health service, and engineering innovative systems and processes of care to facilitate delivery of expertise should be considered.

Aims: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a costly condition for health service provision yet variation in the delivery of care between hospitals persists. A composite measure of adherence with evidence-based clinical-process indicators (CPIs) could better inform hospital performance reporting and clinical outcomes in the management of ACS., Methods: Data on 7444 ACS patients from 39 Australian hospitals were used to derive a hospital-specific composite quality score by calculating mean adherence to 14 evidence-based CPIs. Using the generalized estimating equation to account for clustering of patients within hospitals and the GRACE risk score to adjust for differences in presenting risk, we evaluated associations between the hospital-specific composite quality score, in-hospital major adverse events, in-hospital mortality and mortality and readmission for ACS at 6 months., Results: Hospitals had a mean adherence of 68.3% (SD 21.7) with the composite quality score. There was significant variation between hospital adherence tertile 1 (79%) and tertile 3 (56%), P < 0.0001. With risk adjustment, there was an association between hospitals with a higher composite quality score and reduced in-hospital adverse events (OR: 0.85, CI: 0.71-0.99) and survival at hospital discharge (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.28-0.77). There was trending improvement in survival at 6 months (OR 0.48; CI: 0.20-1.16) and fewer readmissions to hospital for ACS at 6 months (OR 0.79; CI 0.60-1.05)., Conclusion: The association between the quality composite score and reduced in-hospital events and survival at hospital discharge supports the utility of reporting CPIs in routine hospital performance reporting on the management of ACS., Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registration (anzctr): CONCORDANCE Registry ACTRN12614000887673., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Variations in the delivery of evidence based care to high risk patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS) exist between hospitals. We hypothesised that the relative proportion of admitted high risk patients contributes to variation in care and outcomes., Methods: Receipt of evidence based therapies (EBT) according to patient risk was documented in the Australian Co-operative National Registry of Acute Coronary Care, Guideline Adherence and Clinical Events (CONCORDANCE). Hospitals were stratified into quartiles (Q) by fraction of high risk patients according to: GRACE Risk Score (GRS), chronic kidney disease (CKD), age, Killip class, and myocardial infarction (MI). For each category, EBT and mortality were compared between hospital groups., Results: This study included 8390 ACS patients from 39 hospitals. Patients with GRS>130, CKD, and >80years, were less likely to receive EBT at high proportion hospitals (p<0.0001 for all). After adjustment, proportion of patients with CKD negatively predicted coronary angiography (CA) (Q4 vs Q1: OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.10-0.45). Adjusted 6month mortality was greater in CKD and trended greater in >80years in hospitals treating the highest proportions of these patients (Q4 vs Q1 OR 3.80, 95%CI 1.85-7.83, and OR 3.10, 95%CI 0.99-9.70 respectively)., Conclusion: Elderly ACS patients and those with CKD are less likely to receive EBT at hospitals seeing high proportions of these patients. Failure to provide EBT to these high risk populations may contribute to avoidable mortality in these institutions., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.)

Objectives: To assess the impact of the availability of a catheterisation laboratory and evidence-based care on the 18-month mortality rate in patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes (ACS)., Design, Setting and Participants: Management and outcomes are described for patients enrolled in the 2012 Australian and New Zealand SNAPSHOT ACS audit. Patients were stratified according to their presentation to hospitals with or without cardiac catheterisation facilities. Data linkage ascertained patient vital status 18 months after admission. Descriptive and Cox proportional hazards analyses determined predictors of outcomes, and were used to estimate the numbers of deaths that could be averted by improved application of evidence-based care., Main Outcome Measures: Mortality for ACS patients from admission to 18 months after admission., Results: Definite ACS patients presenting to catheterisation-capable (CC) hospitals (n = 1326) were more likely to undergo coronary angiography than those presenting to non-CC hospitals (n = 1031) (61.5% v 50.8%; P = 0.0001), receive timely reperfusion (for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients: 45.2% v 19.2%; P < 0.001), and be referred for cardiac rehabilitation (57% v 53%; P = 0.05). All-cause mortality over 18 months was highest for STEMI (16.2%) and non-STEMI (16.3%) patients, and lowest for those presenting with unstable angina (6.8%) and non-cardiac chest pain (4.8%; P < 0.0001 for trend). After adjustment for patient propensity to present to a CC hospital and patient risk, presentation to a CC hospital was associated with 21% (95% CI, 2%-37%) lower mortality than presentation to a non-CC hospital. This mortality difference was attenuated after adjusting for delivery of evidence-based care., Conclusion: In Australia and New Zealand, the availability of a catheterisation laboratory appears to have a significant impact on long-term mortality in ACS patients, which is still substantial. This mortality may be reduced by improvements in evidence-based care in both CC and non-CC hospitals.

Background: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) guidelines recommend that patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) be offered the same therapies as other high-risk ACS patients with normal renal function. Our objective was to describe the gaps in evidence-based care offered to patients with ACS and concomitant CKD., Methods: Patients presenting to 41 Australian hospitals with suspected ACS were stratified by presence of CKD (glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min). Receipt of evidence-based care including, coronary angiography (CA), evidence-based discharge medications (EBMs), and cardiac rehabilitation (CR) referral, were compared between patients with and without CKD. Hospital and clinical factors that predicted receipt of care were determined using multilevel multivariable stepwise logistic regression models., Results: Of the 4,778 patients admitted with suspected ACS, 1,227 had CKD. On univariate analyses, patients with CKD were less likely to undergo CA (59.1% vs 85.0%, P < .0001) or receive EBM (69.4% vs 78.7%, P < .0001), or were offered CR (49.5% vs 68.0%, P < .0001). After adjusting for patient characteristics and clustering by hospital, CKD remained an independent predictor of not undergoing CA only (odds ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.61). Within the CKD cohort, presenting to a hospital with a catheterization laboratory was the strongest predictor of undergoing CA (odds ratio 3.07, 95% CI 1.91-4.93)., Conclusion: The presence of CKD independently predicts failure to undergo CA but not failure to receive EBM or CR, which is predicted by comorbidities. Among the CKD population, performance of CA is largely determined by admission to a catheterization capable hospital. Targeting these patients through standardization of care across institutions offers opportunities to improve outcomes in this high-risk population., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the proportion of patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in Australia and New Zealand who received optimal inpatient preventive care and to identify factors associated with preventive care., Methods: All patients hospitalised bi-nationally with ACS were identified between 14-27 May 2012. Optimal in-hospital preventive care was defined as having received lifestyle advice, referral to rehabilitation, and prescription of secondary prevention pharmacotherapies. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with receipt of optimal preventive care., Results: For the 2299 ACS survivors, mean (SD) age was 69 (13) years, 46% were referred to rehabilitation, 65% were discharged on sufficient preventive medications, and 27% received optimal preventive care. Diagnosis of ST elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 2.64 [95% CI: 1.88-3.71]; p<0.001) and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 1.99 [95% CI: 1.52-2.61]; p<0.001) compared with a diagnosis of unstable angina, having a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (OR: 4.71 [95% CI: 3.67-6.11]; p<0.001) or coronary bypass (OR: 2.10 [95% CI: 1.21-3.60]; p=0.011) during the admission or history of hypertension (OR:1.36 [95% CI: 1.06-1.75]; p=0.017) were associated with greater exposure to preventive care. Age over 70 years (OR:0.53 [95% CI: 0.35-0.79]; p=0.002) or admission to a private hospital (OR:0.59 [95% CI: 0.42-0.84]; p=0.003) were associated with lower exposure to preventive care., Conclusions: Only one-quarter of ACS patients received optimal secondary prevention in-hospital. Patients with UA, who did not have PCI, were over 70 years or were admitted to a private hospital, were less likely to receive optimal care., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objectives: To describe temporal trends in the use of evidence-based medical therapies and management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in Australia and New Zealand., Design, Setting and Participants: Our analysis of the Australian and New Zealand cohort of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) included patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment-elevation ACS (NSTEACS) enrolled continuously between January 2000 and December 2007 from 11 metropolitan and rural centres in Australia and New Zealand., Results: 5615 patients were included in this analysis (1723 with STEMI; 3892 with NSTEACS). During 2000-2007 there was an increase in the use of statin therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, and thienopyridines (P < 0.0001 for each). Among patients with STEMI, there was an increase in emergency revascularisation with PCI (from 11% to 27% [P < 0.0001]), and inhospital coronary angiography (from 61% to 76% [P < 0.0001]). Among patients with NSTEACS, there was an increase in revascularisation with PCI (from 20% to 25% [P = 0.004]). Heart failure rates declined substantially among STEMI and NSTEACS patients (from 21% to 12% [P = 0.0002], and from 13% to 4% [P < 0.0001], respectively) as did rates of hospital readmission for ischaemic heart disease at 6 months (from 23% to 9% [P = 0.0001], and from 24% to 15% [P = 0.0001], respectively)., Conclusions: From 2000 to 2007 in Australia and New Zealand, there was a fall in inhospital events and 6-month readmissions among patients admitted with ACS. This showed an association with improved uptake of guideline-recommended medical and interventional therapies. These data suggest an overall improvement in the quality of care offered to contemporary ACS patients in Australia and New Zealand.