Patient Satisfaction with Care After Coronary Revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Bridging the Divides (Bridges), a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-funded program, developed a post-hospitalization care management infrastructure integrating information technology-enabled informatics with patient care for ischemic heart disease patients. The objective of this study was to assess patient satisfaction with the Bridges program and determine the patient characteristics associated with higher satisfaction. METHODS: All adult English-speaking patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction and agreed to participate in the Bridges program were eligible. A survey instrument was administered to address patient satisfaction of care received, aspects of care that patients appreciated, and challenges faced. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and primary analyses included comparisons of overall patient satisfaction after discharge between procedure type, and according to age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidity count, and length of stay. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-seven (46%) had complete or partial response rates. There was a statistically significant difference in the overall satisfaction among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction (p = 0.023). There were significant procedure by sex (p = 0.052) and procedure by age (p = 0.039) interactions. There were no statistically significant differences in overall satisfaction according to age, sex, race, comorbidity count, or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several important components related to patient satisfaction for patients with ischemic heart disease. Results found that patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting were reportedly "very satisfied" when compared with patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and catheterization plus acute myocardial infarction, as well as significant age and sex interactions between procedures.

Ischemic postconditioning during primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Although some studies have shown potential benefit for ischemic postconditioning (IPoC) during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in improving surrogate markers of reperfusion and infarction size, the benefit of this approach on clinical outcomes remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared IPoC versus conventional treatment during primary PCI. Random effects DerSimonian-Laird risk ratios (RR) were calculated for different clinical and surrogate outcomes. The main outcome of this analysis was all-cause mortality. A total of 25 trials involving 3,619 patients were included in the analysis. At a mean follow up of 14 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.6-19.4 months), the incidence of all-cause mortality was 4.9% [95% CI 3.8-6.0%] in the IPoC group versus 3.8% [95% CI 1.9-5.7%] in the control group (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68-1.24, P = 0.74). The risk of reinfarction (2.7% [95% CI 1.1-4.3%] vs. 2.3% [0.6-4.0%]; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.62-2.68, P = 0.72), heart failure (3.6% [95% CI 2.0-5.1%] vs. 5.7% [95% CI 3.3-8.2%]; RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58-1.06, P = 0.24), target vessel revascularization (3.2% [95% CI 1.7-4.7%] vs. 2.4% [95% CI 1.4-3.3%]; RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.90-2.20, P = 0.20), and stent thrombosis (2.4% [95% CI 1.1-3.8%] vs. 1.8% [95% CI 0.5-3.2%]); RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.60-3.70, P = 0.40) was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: IPoC does not appear to reduce the risk of clinical adverse events in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.