Health-related quality of life outcomes with prasugrel among medically managed non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: Insights from the Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes (TRILOGY ACS) trial.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated without revascularization. The TRILOGY ACS trial randomized patients with ACS to either prasugrel or clopidogrel therapy plus aspirin. Outcomes showed a complex pattern suggestive of late benefits with respect to repeat clinical events and benefits confined to patients who underwent angiography. Here, we examine the HRQoL correlates of these patterns. METHODS: HRQoL was measured at baseline and 3, 12, and 24 months or end of study (EOS) in 7243 patients aged <75 years using the EuroQol 3-level, group 5-dimension index (EQ-5D). Linear mixed effects models for repeated measures were used to examine treatment differences in HRQoL overall, stratified by angiography status, and among patients who did and did not have non-fatal events. RESULTS: No baseline differences in HRQoL were seen between patients randomized to prasugrel (n=3620) or clopidogrel (n=3623). At 24 months, remaining patients assigned to prasugrel (n=1450) vs. clopidogrel (n=1443) had higher EQ-5D index scores (86.4 vs. 84.9, P=.01). Mixed effects models found no difference in EQ-5D scores among prasugrel and clopidogrel patients overall across subgroups stratified by angiography status. However, among patients with non-fatal clinical events, patients on clopidogrel reported a larger decrement in HRQoL than patients on prasugrel (79.5±18.1 vs. 80.6±18.0; P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was no difference in HRQoL outcomes among patients receiving prasugrel vs. clopidogrel. However, the differential effects of the treatments among patients with non-fatal events require further investigation.

Quality-of-life outcomes with a disodium EDTA chelation regimen for coronary disease: results from the trial to assess chelation therapy randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health.funded Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) randomized 1708 stablecoronary disease patients aged .50 years who were .6 months post.myocardial infarction (2003.2010) to 40 infusions ofa multicomponent EDTA chelation solution or placebo. Chelation reduced the primary composite end point of mortality,recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angina (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95%confidence interval, 0.69.0.99; P=0.035). METHODS AND RESULTS: In a randomly selected subset of 911 patients, we prospectively collected a battery of quality-of-life(QOL) instruments at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months after randomization. The prespecified primary QOL measures were the Duke Activity Status Index (Table I in the Data Supplement) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 Mental Health Inventory-5. All comparisons were by intention to treat. Baseline clinical and QOL variables were well balanced in the 451 patients randomized to chelation and in the 460 patients randomized to placebo. The Duke Activity Status Index improved in both groups during the first 6 months of therapy, but we found no evidence for a treatment-related difference (mean difference [chelation.placebo] during follow-up, 0.9 [95% confidence interval, .0.7 to 2.6; P=0.27]).There was no statistically significant evidence of a treatment-related difference in the Mental Health Inventory-5 during follow-up (mean difference, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, .0.1 to 2.0; P=0.08). None of the secondary QOL measures showed a consistent treatment-related difference. CONCLUSIONS: In stable, predominantly asymptomatic coronary disease patients with a history of myocardial infarction,EDTA chelation therapy did not have a detectable effect on QOL during 2 years of follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00044213.

Survival of patients receiving a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in clinical practice vs clinical trials.

IMPORTANCE: Randomized clinical trials have shown that implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy saves lives. Whether the survival of patients who received an ICD in primary prevention clinical trials differs from that of trial-eligible patients receiving a primary prevention ICD in clinical practice is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether trial-eligible patients who received a primary prevention ICD as documented in a large national registry have a survival rate that differs from the survival rate of similar patients who received an ICD in the 2 largest primary prevention clinical trials, MADIT-II (n = 742) and SCD-HeFT (n = 829). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective analysis of data for patients enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007, meeting the MADIT-II criteria (2464 propensity score-matched patients) or the SCD-HeFT criteria (3352 propensity score-matched patients). Mortality data for the registry patients were collected through December 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare mortality from any cause. RESULTS: The median follow-up time in MADIT-II, SCD-HeFT, and the ICD Registry was 19.5, 46.1, and 35.2 months, respectively. Compared with patients enrolled in the clinical trials, patients in the ICD Registry were significantly older and had a higher burden of comorbidities. In the matched cohorts, there was no significant difference in survival between MADIT-II-like patients in the registry and MADIT-II patients randomized to receive an ICD (2-year mortality rates: 13.9% and 15.6%, respectively; adjusted ICD Registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.31; P = .62). Likewise, the survival among SCD-HeFT-like patients in the registry was not significantly different from survival among patients randomized to receive ICD therapy in SCD-HeFT (3-year mortality rates: 17.3% and 17.4%, respectively; adjusted registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.97-1.38; P = .11). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There was no significant difference in survival between clinical trial patients randomized to receive an ICD and a similar group of clinical registry patients who received a primary prevention ICD. Our findings support the continued use of primary prevention ICDs in similar patients seen in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000609.

Recovery expectations and long-term prognosis of patients with coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Expectations of patients regarding their prospects for recovery have been shown to predict subsequent physical and social functioning. Evidence regarding the impact of expectations on clinical outcomes is limited. METHODS: At the inpatient service of a tertiary care hospital, we evaluated beliefs of patients undergoing coronary angiography about their prognosis as predictors of long-term survival and 1-year functional status. Baseline assessments, including a measure of expectations for recovery, were obtained during hospitalization with mortality follow-up for approximately 15 years. Patients with significant obstructive coronary artery disease were interviewed while in the hospital and enrolled in follow-up. Functional status was assessed at baseline and 1 year later with questionnaires reflecting physical capabilities. Analyses controlled for age, sex, disease severity, comorbidities, treatments, demographics, depressive symptoms, social support, and functional status. There were 1637 total deaths, 885 from cardiovascular causes, in the 2818 patients in these analyses. The outcomes were total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and 1-year functional status. RESULTS: Expectations were positively associated with survival after controlling for background and clinical disease indicators. For a difference equivalent to an interquartile range of expectations, the hazard ratio (HR) for total mortality was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.82) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.83) for cardiovascular mortality. The HRs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.76-0.91) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70-0.89) with further adjustments for demographic and psychosocial covariates. Similar associations (P < .001) were observed for functional status. CONCLUSION: Recovery expectations at baseline were positively associated with long-term survival and functioning in patients with coronary artery disease.

Quality of life effects of automatic external defibrillators in the home: results from the Home Automatic External Defibrillator Trial (HAT).

BACKGROUND: Public access automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) can save lives, but most deaths from out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest occur at home. The Home Automatic External Defibrillator Trial (HAT) found no survival advantage for adding a home AED to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training for 7,001 patients with a prior anterior wall myocardial infarction. Quality of life (QOL) outcomes for both the patient and spouse/companion were secondary end points. METHODS: A subset of 1,007 study patients and their spouse/companions was randomly selected for ascertainment of QOL by structured interview at baseline and 12 and 24 months after enrollment. The primary QOL measures were the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form psychological well-being (reflecting anxiety and depression) and vitality (reflecting energy and fatigue) subscales. RESULTS: For patients and spouse/companions, the psychological well-being and vitality scales did not differ significantly between those randomly assigned an AED plus CPR training and controls who received CPR training only. None of the other QOL measures collected showed a clinically and statistically significant difference between treatment groups. Patients in the AED group were more likely to report being extremely or quite a bit reassured by their treatment assignment. Spouse/companions in the AED group reported being less often nervous about the possibility of using AED/CPR treatment than those in the CPR group. CONCLUSIONS: Adding access to a home AED to CPR training did not affect QOL either for patients with a prior anterior myocardial infarction or their spouse/companion but did provide more reassurance to the patients without increasing anxiety for spouse/companions.

Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter defibrillators versus quarterly device interrogations in clinic: results from a randomized pilot clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Remote monitoring is increasingly becoming the new standard of care for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) follow-up. We sought to determine whether remote monitoring of ICDs improves patient outcomes compared with quarterly device interrogations in clinic. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this single-center pilot clinical trial, adult patients with an ICD were randomly assigned to remote monitoring versus quarterly device interrogations in clinic. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular hospitalization, emergency room visit for a cardiac cause, and unscheduled visit to the electrophysiology clinic for a device-related issue at 1 year. We also examined health-related quality of life, costs, and patient satisfaction with their ICD care. Of 151 patients enrolled in this trial, 76 were randomized to remote monitoring and 75 to quarterly device interrogations in clinic. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint (32% in the remote monitoring arm vs 34% in the control arm; P = 0.8), mortality, or cost between the 2 arms. Quality of life and patient satisfaction were significantly better in the control arm than in the remote monitoring arm at 6 months (83 [25th, 75th percentiles 70, 90] vs 75 [50, 85]; P = 0.002 and 88 [75, 100] vs 75 [75, 88]; P = 0.03, respectively), but not at 12 months. CONCLUSION: We showed no significant reduction in cardiac-related resource utilization with remote monitoring of ICDs. However, given the small number of patients in our study, the real clinical and health economics impact of remote monitoring needs to be verified by a large, multicenter, randomized clinical trial.

The Adherence eValuation After Ischemic Stroke Longitudinal (AVAIL) registry: design, rationale, and baseline patient characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one third of the 780,000 people in the United States who have a stroke each year have recurrent events. Although efficacious secondary prevention measures are available, levels of adherence to these strategies in patients who have had stroke are largely unknown. Understanding medication-taking behavior in this population is an important step to optimizing the appropriate use of proven secondary preventive therapies and reducing the risk of recurrent stroke. METHODS: The Adherence eValuation After Ischemic Stroke Longitudinal (AVAIL) registry is a prospective study of adherence to stroke prevention medications from hospital discharge to 1 year in patients admitted with stroke or transient ischemic attack. The primary outcomes are medication usage as determined by patient interviews after 3 and 12 months. Potential patient-, provider-, and system-level barriers to persistence of medication use are also collected. Secondary outcomes include the rates of recurrent stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular events, and rehospitalization and functional status as measured by the modified Rankin score. RESULTS: The AVAIL enrolled about 2,900 subjects from 106 hospitals from July 2006 through July 2008. The 12-month follow-up will be completed in August 2009. CONCLUSIONS: The AVAIL registry will document the current state of adherence and persistence to stroke prevention medications among a nationwide sample of patients. These data will be used to design interventions to improve the quality of care post acute hospitalization and reduce the risks of future stroke and cardiovascular events.

Quality of life after late invasive therapy for occluded arteries.

BACKGROUND: The open-artery hypothesis postulates that late opening of an infarct-related artery after myocardial infarction will improve clinical outcomes. We evaluated the quality-of-life and economic outcomes associated with the use of this strategy. METHODS: We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus stenting with medical therapy alone in high-risk patients in stable condition who had a totally occluded infarct-related artery 3 to 28 days after myocardial infarction. In 951 patients (44% of those eligible), we assessed quality of life by means of a battery of tests that included two principal outcome measures, the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) (which measures cardiac physical function on a scale from 0 to 58, with higher scores indicating better function) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Mental Health Inventory 5 (which measures psychological well-being). Structured quality-of-life interviews were performed at baseline and at 4, 12, and 24 months. Costs of treatment were assessed for 458 of 469 patients in the United States (98%), and 2-year cost-effectiveness was estimated. RESULTS: At 4 months, the medical-therapy group, as compared with the PCI group, had a clinically marginal decrease of 3.4 points in the DASI score (P=0.007). At 1 and 2 years, the differences were smaller. No significant differences in psychological well-being were observed. For the 469 patients in the United States, cumulative 2-year costs were approximately $7,000 higher in the PCI group (P<0.001), and the quality-adjusted survival was marginally longer in the medical-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: PCI was associated with a marginal advantage in cardiac physical function at 4 months but not thereafter. At 2 years, medical therapy remained significantly less expensive than routine PCI and was associated with marginally longer quality-adjusted survival. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004562.)

Quality of life with defibrillator therapy or amiodarone in heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy significantly prolongs life in patients at increased risk for sudden death from depressed left ventricular function. However, whether this increased longevity is accompanied by deterioration in the quality of life is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized trial, we compared ICD therapy or amiodarone with state-of-the-art medical therapy alone in 2521 patients who had stable heart failure with depressed left ventricular function. We prospectively measured quality of life at baseline and at months 3, 12, and 30; data collection was 93 to 98% complete. The Duke Activity Status Index (which measures cardiac physical functioning) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Mental Health Inventory 5 (which measures psychological well-being) were prespecified primary outcomes. Multiple additional quality-of-life outcomes were also examined. RESULTS: Psychological well-being in the ICD group, as compared with medical therapy alone, was significantly improved at 3 months (P=0.01) and at 12 months (P=0.003) but not at 30 months. No clinically or statistically significant differences in physical functioning among the study groups were observed. Additional quality-of-life measures were improved in the ICD group at 3 months, 12 months, or both, but there was no significant difference at 30 months. ICD shocks in the month preceding a scheduled assessment were associated with a decreased quality of life in multiple domains. The use of amiodarone had no significant effects on the primary quality-of-life outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a large primary-prevention population with moderately symptomatic heart failure, single-lead ICD therapy was not associated with any detectable adverse quality-of-life effects during 30 months of follow-up.

Home use of automated external defibrillators for sudden cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: The most common location of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest is the home, a situation in which emergency medical services are challenged to provide timely care. Consequently, home use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) might offer an opportunity to improve survival for patients at risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7001 patients with previous anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to receive one of two responses to sudden cardiac arrest occurring at home: either the control response (calling emergency medical services and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR]) or the use of an AED, followed by calling emergency medical services and performing CPR. The primary outcome was death from any cause. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 62 years; 17% were women. The median follow-up was 37.3 months. Overall, 450 patients died: 228 of 3506 patients (6.5%) in the control group and 222 of 3495 patients (6.4%) in the AED group (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.17; P=0.77). Mortality did not differ significantly in major prespecified subgroups. Only 160 deaths (35.6%) were considered to be from sudden cardiac arrest from tachyarrhythmia. Of these deaths, 117 occurred at home; 58 at-home events were witnessed. AEDs were used in 32 patients. Of these patients, 14 received an appropriate shock, and 4 survived to hospital discharge. There were no documented inappropriate shocks. CONCLUSIONS: For survivors of anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator, access to a home AED did not significantly improve overall survival, as compared with reliance on conventional resuscitation methods. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047411 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Rationale and design of the Home Automatic External Defibrillator Trial (HAT).

Most cardiac arrests occur in the home, where emergency medical services (EMS) systems are challenged to provide timely care. Because a large proportion of sudden cardiac arrests (SCAs) are due to ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, home use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) might offer an opportunity to decrease mortality in those at risk. Predicting who will have a cardiac arrest in the general population is difficult. Individuals at high risk are usually easily identified and may become candidates for implantable cardioverter defibrillators. It is within the population at lower risk where home AEDs may be most useful. The purpose of the Home Automatic External Defibrillator Trial (HAT) is to test whether providing home access to an AED can improve survival in patients at modest risk of SCA, such as those surviving an anterior myocardial infarction but in whom implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy is not deemed necessary. Between January 23, 2003, and October 20, 2005, 7001 patients were enrolled, with completion of follow-up scheduled for September 30, 2007. Randomization was conducted in a 1:1 fashion between control therapy, comprising the standard lay response to SCA (calling the EMS and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation), and the use of an AED first, followed by calling the EMS and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The primary end point is all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include survival from SCA (witnessed and unwitnessed, in home and out of home), incremental cost-effectiveness, and quality of life measures for both the patient and the spouse/companion. The results of the trial should be available in mid 2008.

Impact of rate-modulated pacing on quality of life and exercise capacity--evidence from the Advanced Elements of Pacing Randomized Controlled Trial (ADEPT).

BACKGROUND: Ninety-nine percent of pacemakers implanted in the United States include an option for rate modulation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether dual-chamber rate-modulated pacing, when compared with dual-chamber pacing alone, improved quality of life. METHODS: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing dual-chamber with rate-modulated dual-chamber pacing. Patients were enrolled between January 12, 2000, and January 10, 2002, with 1-year follow-up ending December 19, 2002. The study was a U.S. multicenter trial, with 95 sites participating. All patients received a rate modulation-capable dual-chamber pacemaker for standard indications. Patients were screened with an exercise test (Chronotropic Assessment Exercise Protocol) 1 month later. One thousand two hundred seventy-three patients were enrolled; 401 proved ineligible, and 872 (68%) made up the randomized patient cohort. Randomized patients had a mean age of 71 years, 64% were men, and 64% had sinus node dysfunction. Randomization was in a factorial design to (1) dual-chamber rate-modulated pacing versus dual-chamber pacing and (2) automatic mode switching versus no automatic mode switching. The present report is limited to the comparison of rate modulation with no rate modulation (DDDR vs. DDD). The primary endpoint was the score on the Specific Activity Scale, an activity-based cardiovascular disease-specific instrument at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included 6-month treadmill time and additional cardiovascular disease-specific, and generic health-related quality-of-life instruments at 1 year. RESULTS: At 6 months, patients with rate modulation had a higher peak exercise heart rate (rate modulation 113.3 +/- 19.6, no rate modulation 101.1 +/- 21.1; P <.0001). Total exercise time was not different between groups. At 1 year, there were no significant differences between groups with respect to Specific Activity Scale or the secondary quality-of-life endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that rate modulation is ineffective in improving the functional status or quality of life of patients with a bradycardia indication for dual-chamber pacing.

Cost-effectiveness of defibrillator therapy or amiodarone in chronic stable heart failure: results from the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT).

BACKGROUND: In the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy significantly reduced all-cause mortality rates compared with medical therapy alone in patients with stable, moderately symptomatic heart failure, whereas amiodarone had no benefit on mortality rates. We examined long-term economic implications of these results. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medical costs were estimated by using hospital billing data and the Medicare Fee Schedule. Our base case cost-effectiveness analysis used empirical clinical and cost data to estimate the lifetime incremental cost of saving an extra life-year with ICD therapy relative to medical therapy alone. At 5 years, the amiodarone arm had a survival rate equivalent to that of the placebo arm and higher costs than the placebo arm. For ICD relative to medical therapy alone, the base case lifetime cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios (discounted at 3%) were dollar 38,389 per life-year saved (LYS) and dollar 41,530 per quality-adjusted LYS, respectively. A cost-effectiveness ratio < dollar 100,000 was obtained in 99% of 1000 bootstrap repetitions. The cost-effectiveness ratio was sensitive to the amount of extrapolation beyond the empirical 5-year trial data: dollar 127,503 per LYS at 5 years, dollar 88,657 per LYS at 8 years, and dollar 58,510 per LYS at 12 years. Because of a significant interaction between ICD treatment and New York Heart Association class, the cost-effectiveness ratio was dollar 29,872 per LYS for class II, whereas there was incremental cost but no incremental benefit in class III. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic use of single-lead, shock-only ICD therapy is economically attractive in patients with stable, moderately symptomatic heart failure with an ejection fraction < or = 35%, particularly those in NYHA class II, as long as the benefits of ICD therapy observed in the SCD-HeFT persist for at least 8 years.

Perceived social support as a predictor of mortality in coronary patients: effects of smoking, sedentary behavior, and depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have shown network assessments of social contact predict mortality in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Fewer studies have demonstrated an association between perceived social support and longevity in patient samples. It has been suggested that 1 of the mechanisms linking social support with elevated risk for mortality is the association between social support and other risk factors associated with decreased longevity such as smoking, failure to exercise, and depressive symptoms. The present study examined an assessment of perceived support as a predictor of all-cause and CAD mortality and examined the hypothesis that smoking, sedentary behavior, and depressive symptoms may mediate and/or moderate this association. METHODS: Ratings of social support and the risk factors of smoking, sedentary behavior, and depressive symptoms were examined as predictors of survival in 2711 patients with CAD, and associations between support and these risk factors were assessed. Smoking, sedentary behavior, and depressive symptoms were examined as mediators and/or moderators of the association between social support and mortality. RESULTS: Social support, smoking, sedentary behavior, and depressive symptoms were predictors of mortality (p's <.01). Results also indicated that sedentary behavior, but not smoking status or depressive symptoms, may substantially mediate the relationship between support and mortality. No evidence for moderation was found. CONCLUSIONS: The relation between social support and longevity may be partially accounted for by the association between support and sedentary behavior.

Amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for congestive heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Sudden death from cardiac causes remains a leading cause of death among patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). Treatment with amiodarone or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has been proposed to improve the prognosis in such patients. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2521 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III CHF and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35 percent or less to conventional therapy for CHF plus placebo (847 patients), conventional therapy plus amiodarone (845 patients), or conventional therapy plus a conservatively programmed, shock-only, single-lead ICD (829 patients). Placebo and amiodarone were administered in a double-blind fashion. The primary end point was death from any cause. RESULTS: The median LVEF in patients was 25 percent; 70 percent were in NYHA class II, and 30 percent were in class III CHF. The cause of CHF was ischemic in 52 percent and nonischemic in 48 percent. The median follow-up was 45.5 months. There were 244 deaths (29 percent) in the placebo group, 240 (28 percent) in the amiodarone group, and 182 (22 percent) in the ICD group. As compared with placebo, amiodarone was associated with a similar risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.06; 97.5 percent confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.30; P=0.53) and ICD therapy was associated with a decreased risk of death of 23 percent (0.77; 97.5 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.96; P=0.007) and an absolute decrease in mortality of 7.2 percentage points after five years in the overall population. Results did not vary according to either ischemic or nonischemic causes of CHF, but they did vary according to the NYHA class. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NYHA class II or III CHF and LVEF of 35 percent or less, amiodarone has no favorable effect on survival, whereas single-lead, shock-only ICD therapy reduces overall mortality by 23 percent.

Impact of different patterns of invasive care on quality of life outcomes in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: results from the GUSTO-IIb Canada-United States substudy.

BACKGROUND: Comparing American and Canadian practice patterns and outcomes offers a natural experiment to examine the relative benefits of aggressive versus conservative management of coronary artery disease. In a prospective substudy of the Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries IIb (GUSTO-IIb) trial, differences in the management of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome, and the associated impact on quality of life (QOL) outcomes, were examined in the two countries. METHODS AND RESULTS: The patient population, selected randomly from the parent trial population, comprised 390 Canadian and 1122 American patients for whom both baseline and one-year data were available. Validated instruments were used to assess QOL, including the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) and scales from the SF-36 questionnaire. At baseline, American patients had significantly higher cardiac catheterization rates (83% versus 45%), percutaneous coronary intervention rates (39% versus 24%) and coronary bypass surgery rates (19% versus 12%) than did Canadian patients, respectively. However, at one year, Canadian coronary bypass surgery rates were at par with those in the United States (24% versus 26%, respectively). At baseline, the mean DASI score was 24.6 among Canadian patients and 23.4 among American patients (P=0.14). At one year, neither cohort reported any significant change in functional scores and there was no intercountry difference in DASI scores, even after accounting for baseline risk. Canadian patients had significantly worse mental health scores than American patients at baseline (mean score 71.6 versus 75.4, respectively; P=0.02), but by one year, Canadian patients had better scores (mean score 80.1 versus 76.2, respectively; P=0.01). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, Canadian patients continued to report better mental health status scores than did American patients (4 points higher, P<0.01). When asked to rate their health state on a scale from 0 to 100, both cohorts reported similar values at baseline. However, after adjusting for baseline characteristics, American patients' perception of their health state was better than that reported by Canadians (3 points higher, P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite higher rates of invasive procedures in the American cohort, one-year QOL outcomes in the cohort were similar to those in the more conservatively managed Canadian cohort. These results suggest that routine cardiac catheterization and increased procedure use may be associated with diminishing marginal returns with respect to improving QOL outcomes among patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes.

Prospective study of perceived stress in cardiac patients.

BACKGROUND: Psychological stress is known to have a negative effect on the health and well-being of coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. Although the study of stress CAD samples has received considerable attention, few studies have examined the effects of gender and age, had multiple follow-ups over an extended period, and had extensive baseline assessment batteries. PURPOSE: In this study, demographic, clinical, social, and personality variables were evaluated as predictors of nine repeated assessments of stress over a 2-year period in 322 CAD patients (33.2% female). METHODS: At baseline, perceived social support, coping style, and social conflict were associated with stress ratings. Mixed models were used to evaluate predictors of reported stress during the subsequent 2 years. RESULTS: The results showed that higher stress was present in patients who were female and young. Follow-up stress was also found in patients with moderate income, congestive heart failure, high social conflict, low social support, and negative coping style. CONCLUSIONS: These findings may help clinicians identify patients who are likely to experience higher levels of stress over a prolonged period following a diagnosis of CAD and may also suggest which patients may benefit most from stress reduction interventions.

Predictors of smoking cessation in patients with a diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine demographic, psychosocial, and clinical variables as predictors of smoking cessation in patients with coronary artery disease. METHODS: Smoking status and psychosocial variables were obtained at baseline. Participants were followed up at 3 months then annually up to 6 years for smoking status. Participants were recruited from the population of patients undergoing coronary angiography from 1986 through 1990. Patients were included in the study if they reported smoking at baseline and had valid data for demographic and clinical measures of interest. Depending on the psychosocial measure analyzed, sample size ranged from 525 to 303. Age, gender, education, marital status, disease severity, cardiac procedure, hostility, and four ratings of distress were evaluated as predictors of smoking cessation. RESULTS: Of the full sample, 40% (n = 210) quit smoking without relapse. Education (odds ratio [OR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.84; P <.003), disease severity (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.40-0.84; P <.004), and coronary artery bypass surgery (OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.43-0.85; P <.004) were associated with a lower likelihood of relapse. Higher levels of hostility (OR 2.36; 95% CI 1.46-3.84; P <.001), concern about health (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.33-2.74; P <.001), tension (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.12-2.30; P <.012), and depressive feelings (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.12-2.27; P <.010) were associated with a higher risk of continuing to smoke. CONCLUSIONS: These findings describe demographic, clinical, and psychological mechanisms that might underlie successful smoking cessation and also may guide the identification of patients in need of special intervention.