50
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      International comparisons of the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and the United States: The MINAP/NICOR, SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, and ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR registries ☆☆

      research-article
      a , * , b , c , d , d , e , f , g , h , d , i , b
      International Journal of Cardiology
      Elsevier
      ACEI, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, ACS, acute coronary syndrome, ACTION Registry-GWTG, The Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry — Get With The Guidelines , ARB, angiotensin receptor blockers, CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting, ECG, electrocardiogram, GRACE, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events, MI, myocardial infarction, MINAP, Myocardial Ischemia National Audit Project, NCDR, National Cardiovascular Data Registry, NSTEMI, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, NICOR, National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention, RIKS-HIA, Register of Information and Knowledge About Swedish Heart Intensive Care Admissions , SWEDEHEART, Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies , UK, England/Wales, US, United States, Acute myocardial infarction, International comparisons, Clinical registries, Treatment

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To compare management of patients with acute non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in three developed countries with national ongoing registries.

          Background

          Results from clinical trials suggest significant variation in care across the world. However, international comparisons in “real world” registries are limited.

          Methods

          We compared the use of in-hospital procedures and discharge medications for patients admitted with NSTEMI from 2007 to 2010 using the unselective MINAP/NICOR [England and Wales (UK); n = 137,009], the unselective SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA (Sweden; n = 45,069), and the selective ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR [United States (US); n = 147,438] clinical registries.

          Results

          Patients enrolled among the three registries were generally similar except those in the US who were younger but had higher rates of smoking, diabetes, hypertension, prior heart failure, and prior MI than in Sweden or in UK. Angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were performed more often in the US (76% and 44%) and Sweden (65% and 42%) relative to the UK (32% and 22%). Discharge betablockers were also prescribed more often in the US (89%) and Sweden (89%) than in the UK (76%). In contrast, discharge statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB), and dual antiplatelet agents (among those not receiving PCI) were higher in the UK (92%, 79%, and 71%) than in the US (85%, 65%, 41%) and Sweden (81%, 69%, and 49%).

          Conclusions

          The care for patients with NSTEMI differed substantially among the three countries. These differences in care among countries provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research as well as identify opportunities for global quality improvement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Swedish Web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies (SWEDEHEART).

          The aims of the Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) are to support the improvement of care and evidence-based development of therapy of coronary artery disease (CAD). To provide users with online interactive reports monitoring the processes of care and outcomes and allowing direct comparisons over time and with other hospitals. National, regional and county-based reports are publicly presented on a yearly basis. Every hospital (n=74) in Sweden providing the relevant services participates. Launched in 2009 after merging four national registries on CAD. Consecutive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, and patients undergoing coronary angiography/angioplasty or heart surgery. Includes approximately 80, 000 new cases each year. On admission in ACS patients, at coronary angiography in patients with stable CAD. 106 variables for patients with ACS, another 75 variables regarding secondary prevention after 12-14 months, 150 variables for patients undergoing coronary angiography/angioplasty, 100 variables for patients undergoing heart surgery. Web-based registry with all data registered online directly by the caregiver. A monitor visits approximately 20 hospitals each year. In 2007, there was a 96% agreement. Merged with the National Cause of Death Register, including information about vital status of all Swedish citizens, the National Patient Registry, containing diagnoses at discharge for all hospital stays in Sweden and the National Registry of Drug prescriptions recording all drug prescriptions in Sweden. Available for research by application to the SWEDEHEART steering group.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban.

            There is continued debate as to whether a routine, early invasive strategy is superior to a conservative strategy for the management of unstable angina and myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation. We enrolled 2220 patients with unstable angina and myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who had electrocardiographic evidence of changes in the ST segment or T wave, elevated levels of cardiac markers, a history of coronary artery disease, or all three findings. All patients were treated with aspirin, heparin, and the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. They were randomly assigned to an early invasive strategy, which included routine catheterization within 4 to 48 hours and revascularization as appropriate, or to a more conservative (selectively invasive) strategy, in which catheterization was performed only if the patient had objective evidence of recurrent ischemia or an abnormal stress test. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for an acute coronary syndrome at six months. At six months, the rate of the primary end point was 15.9 percent with use of the early invasive strategy and 19.4 percent with use of the conservative strategy (odds ratio, 0.78; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.97; P=0.025). The rate of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at six months was similarly reduced (7.3 percent vs. 9.5 percent; odds ratio, 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.54 to 1.00; P<0.05). In patients with unstable angina and myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who were treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban, the use of an early invasive strategy significantly reduced the incidence of major cardiac events. These data support a policy involving broader use of the early inhibition of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in combination with an early invasive strategy in such patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Completeness and diagnostic validity of recording acute myocardial infarction events in primary care, hospital care, disease registry, and national mortality records: cohort study

              Objective To determine the completeness and diagnostic validity of myocardial infarction recording across four national health record sources in primary care, hospital care, a disease registry, and mortality register. Design Cohort study. Participants 21 482 patients with acute myocardial infarction in England between January 2003 and March 2009, identified in four prospectively collected, linked electronic health record sources: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (primary care data), Hospital Episode Statistics (hospital admissions), the disease registry MINAP (Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project), and the Office for National Statistics mortality register (cause specific mortality data). Setting One country (England) with one health system (the National Health Service). Main outcome measures Recording of acute myocardial infarction, incidence, all cause mortality within one year of acute myocardial infarction, and diagnostic validity of acute myocardial infarction compared with electrocardiographic and troponin findings in the disease registry (gold standard). Results Risk factors and non-cardiovascular coexisting conditions were similar across patients identified in primary care, hospital admission, and registry sources. Immediate all cause mortality was highest among patients with acute myocardial infarction recorded in primary care, which (unlike hospital admission and disease registry sources) included patients who did not reach hospital, but at one year mortality rates in cohorts from each source were similar. 5561 (31.0%) patients with non-fatal acute myocardial infarction were recorded in all three sources and 11 482 (63.9%) in at least two sources. The crude incidence of acute myocardial infarction was underestimated by 25-50% using one source compared with using all three sources. Compared with acute myocardial infarction defined in the disease registry, the positive predictive value of acute myocardial infarction recorded in primary care was 92.2% (95% confidence interval 91.6% to 92.8%) and in hospital admissions was 91.5% (90.8% to 92.1%). Conclusion Each data source missed a substantial proportion (25-50%) of myocardial infarction events. Failure to use linked electronic health records from primary care, hospital care, disease registry, and death certificates may lead to biased estimates of the incidence and outcome of myocardial infarction. Trial registration NCT01569139 clinicaltrials.gov.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Int J Cardiol
                Int. J. Cardiol
                International Journal of Cardiology
                Elsevier
                0167-5273
                1874-1754
                01 August 2014
                01 August 2014
                : 175
                : 2
                : 240-247
                Affiliations
                [a ]Yale University School of Medicine, Cardiovascular Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
                [b ]Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research @ UCL Partners, University College London, London, UK
                [c ]Dept of Medicine (Huddinge), Cardiology, Karolinska Institutet, and Dept of Cardiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
                [d ]Duke Clinical Research Institution, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
                [e ]National Institute for Health Research, Biomedical Research Unit, Barts Health London, UK
                [f ]Dept. of Medical Sciences, Cardiology and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
                [g ]University College London, London, UK
                [h ]Ronald Reagan-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
                [i ]Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: 333 Cedar Street, PO Box 208017, New Haven, CT 06520-8017, USA. Tel.: + 1 203 785 4127; fax: + 1 203 785 4111. robert.mcnamara@ 123456yale.edu
                Article
                S0167-5273(14)00967-X
                10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.04.270
                4112832
                24882696
                100a5031-8b75-4fce-b92e-758959140d0d
                © 2014 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).

                History
                : 29 January 2014
                : 30 April 2014
                Categories
                Article

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                acei, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors,acs, acute coronary syndrome,action registry-gwtg, the acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network registry — get with the guidelines,arb, angiotensin receptor blockers,cabg, coronary artery bypass grafting,ecg, electrocardiogram,grace, global registry of acute coronary events,mi, myocardial infarction,minap, myocardial ischemia national audit project,ncdr, national cardiovascular data registry,nstemi, non-st segment elevation myocardial infarction,nicor, national institute for cardiovascular outcomes research,pci, percutaneous coronary intervention,riks-hia, register of information and knowledge about swedish heart intensive care admissions

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content287

                Cited by38

                Most referenced authors792