Trends in Acute Myocardial Infarction in 4 US States Between 1992 and 2001
Open Access
- 19 December 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 114 (25) , 2806-2814
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.611707
Abstract
Background— Because of the health impact of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), substantial resources have been dedicated to improving AMI care and outcomes. Long-term trends in the clinical characteristics, quality of care, and outcomes for AMI over time from the health system perspective in geographically diverse populations are not well known. Methods and Results— The present study included 20 550 Medicare patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized in 4 US states (Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, Wisconsin) with the confirmed primary discharge diagnosis of AMI in 4 periods: 1992–1993 (n=10 292), 1995 (n=5566), 1998–1999 (n=2413), and 2000–2001 (n=2279). With the use of standard quality indicator definitions, treatment of ideal candidates with aspirin and β-blockers within 24 hours after presentation, β-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge was assessed. Multivariable models were constructed to calculate adjusted 1-year mortality. The hospitalized Medicare population with AMI changed substantially during 1992–2001, with increasing age, more comorbidity, and fewer meeting ideal treatment criteria. Although treatment rates increased significantly for all medications, aspirin, β-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were not provided at discharge to 12.6%, 19.7%, and 25.2% of ideal candidates, respectively, in 2000–2001. Crude 1-year mortality increased (27.6%, 28.3%, 30.6%, and 31.0%; P =0.003 for trend, but adjusted mortality declined (compared with 1992–1993, relative risk in 1995=0.94 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.01]; relative risk in 1998–1999=0.91 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.98]; relative risk in 2000–2001=0.87 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.94]). Conclusions— The quality of care and adjusted 1-year mortality improved significantly for Medicare beneficiaries with AMI during 1992–2001. Nevertheless, fewer were ideal for guideline-based therapy, and absolute mortality remains high, suggesting the need for treatment strategies applicable to a broader range of older patients.Keywords
This publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- A new definition for myocardial infarction: what difference does it make?European Heart Journal, 2005
- Trends in the Sensitivity, Positive Predictive Value, False-Positive Rate, and Comparability Ratio of Hospital Discharge Diagnosis Codes for Acute Myocardial Infarction in Four US Communities, 1987-2000American Journal of Epidemiology, 2004
- A 25-year perspective into the changing landscape of patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (the Worcester Heart Attack Study)The American Journal of Cardiology, 2004
- Evidence-Based Therapies for Myocardial Infarction: Secular Trends and Determinants of Practice in the CommunityMayo Clinic Proceedings, 2004
- Homocysteine and cardiovascular disease: biological mechanisms, observational epidemiology, and the need for randomized trialsAmerican Heart Journal, 2004
- Case Definitions for Acute Coronary Heart Disease in Epidemiology and Clinical Research StudiesCirculation, 2003
- Most hospitalized older persons do not meet the enrollment criteria for clinical trials in heart failureAmerican Heart Journal, 2003
- Challenges and opportunities in quantifying the quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: Summary from the acute myocardial infarction working group of the American heart association/American college of cardiology first scientific forum on quality of care and outcomes research in cardiovascular disease and strokeJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2003
- Temporal trends in the treatment of over 1.5 million patients with myocardial infarction in the U.S. from 1990 through 1999Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2000
- Studying Outcomes and Hospital Utilization in the ElderlyMedical Care, 1992