Search

Background: There is wide variation in the use of radial over femoral access for patients with ACS. This study evaluates the factors associated with the selection of radial versus femoral angiography in Australia and New Zealand and the effect of access site on clinical events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients.Methods: An analysis of the SNAPSHOT ACS audit was conducted during May 2012 across 286 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Data collected included baseline patient characteristics, hospital site details, treatment received, clinical events in-hospital and mortality at 18 months. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed.Results: Of the 1621 patients undergoing coronary angiography, access was through the femoral artery in 1043 (63%), and the radial in 578 (36%) patients. Radial access dominated in New Zealand (241 out of 327, 73.7%), compared to Australia (337 out of 1293, 26.1%, p=<0.001), with interstate variation (6% to 54%, p=<0.001). Independent predictors of access site included country of admission (Odds of radial, Aus v NZ OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.24, p=<0.0001), prior CABG surgery (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.31, p=<0.0001), high GRACE score (90th decile) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.91, p=0.026) and admission to a centre with high annual PCI volume (>209 cases per year) (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.06-3.26, p=0.03). After adjustment, there was no difference in clinical events in-hospital or mortality at 18 months CONCLUSION: Coronary angiography in New Zealand rather than Australia is the strongest predictor of radial access in ACS patients. There was no difference in outcomes according to access site in this population based cohort study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To describe self-reported patterns of care for glaucoma of ophthalmologists in Australia and New Zealand and summarize current practice styles and patterns associated with glaucoma management. Methods: A questionnaire of glaucoma management practices was mailed to all ophthalmologists registered with the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists in June 2003. The questionnaire assessed practice preferences for medical management, examination techniques and indications for surgery. The results were cross-tabulated by age, country and subspecialty training in glaucoma. Results: Fifty-one per cent of 761 surveys were returned, 14% being from glaucoma specialists. New Zealand ophthalmologists proceeded to surgical management of glaucoma earlier than did their Australian colleagues. Australian ophthalmologists tended to use argon laser trabeculoplasty more frequently. Ninety-six per cent of ophthalmologists routinely use gonioscopy in diagnosing glaucoma. Disc drawings and recording cup:disc ratios were the most commonly used methods of documenting disc morphology; glaucoma specialists were more likely to use imaging technologies. SITA-Standard 24-2 was the most commonly used modality of perimetry, and was favoured by glaucoma specialists. Conclusions: This survey represents the first Australian and New Zealand effort to identify glaucoma management practices. Although a substantial consensus was found in most areas of treatment, a few areas showed diversity. The information gathered will enable ophthalmologists to compare their own practices with those of their colleagues. In addition, this survey provides a baseline allowing future trends in management to be determined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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-wee 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]