Sex differences in long-term mortality after myocardial infarction: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Studies of sex differences in long-term mortality after acute myocardial infarction have reported mixed results. A systematic review is needed to characterize what is known about sex differences in long-term outcomes and to define gaps in knowledge. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched the Medline database from 1966 to December 2012 to identify all studies that provided sex-based comparisons of mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Only studies with at least 5 years of follow-up were reviewed. Of the 1877 identified abstracts, 52 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 39 were included in this review. Most studies included fewer than one-third women. There was significant heterogeneity across studies in patient populations, methodology, and risk adjustment, which produced substantial variability in risk estimates. In general, most studies reported higher unadjusted mortality for women compared with men at both 5 and 10 years after acute myocardial infarction; however, many of the differences in mortality became attenuated after adjustment for age. Multivariable models varied between studies; however, most reported a further reduction in sex differences after adjustment for covariates other than age. Few studies examined sex-by-age interactions; however, several studies reported interactions between sex and treatment whereby women have similar mortality risk as men after revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences in long-term mortality after acute myocardial infarction are largely explained by differences in age, comorbidities, and treatment use between women and men. Future research should aim to clarify how these differences in risk factors and presentation contribute to the sex gap in mortality.

Delay in reperfusion with transradial percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Might some delays be acceptable?

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) suggest benefits for the transradial approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, transradial PCI may delay reperfusion, leading to its avoidance. We sought to quantify the delay in reperfusion from transradial PCI ("transradial delay") that would need to be introduced to offset the potential mortality benefit of transradial PCI, compared with transfemoral, observed in RCTs. METHODS: We developed a decision-analytic model to compare transfemoral and transradial PCI in STEMI. Thirty-day mortality rates were estimated by pooling STEMI patients from 2 RCTs comparing transfemoral and transradial PCI. We projected the impact of transradial delay using estimates of the increase in mortality associated with door-to-balloon time delays. Sensitivity analyses were performed to understand the impact of uncertainty in assumptions. RESULTS: In the base case, a transradial delay of 83.0 minutes was needed to offset the mortality benefit of transradial PCI. When the mortality benefit of transradial PCI was one-quarter that observed in RCTs, the delay associated with equivalent mortality was 20.9 minutes. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, transradial PCI was preferred over transfemoral PCI in 97.5% of simulations when transradial delay was 30 minutes and in 79.0% of simulations when delay was 60 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial transradial delay is required to eliminate even a fraction of the mortality benefit observed with transradial PCI in RCTs. Results were robust to changing multiple assumptions and have implications for operators reluctant to transition to transradial PCI in STEMI because of concern for delaying reperfusion.

Variations in the use of an innovative technology by payer: the case of drug-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND: Despite receiving identical reimbursement for treating heart disease patients with bare metal stents (BMS) or drug-eluting coronary stents (DES), cardiologists' use of the new technology (DES) may have varied by patient payer type as DES diffused. Payer-related factors that differ between hospitals and/or differential treatment inside hospitals might explain any overall differences by payer type. OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between payer and DES use and to examine between-hospital and within-hospital variation in DES use over time. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 4.1 million hospitalizations involving DES or BMS from 2003 to 2008 Nationwide Inpatient Sample. We estimated hybrid-fixed effects logit models and calculated the adjusted within-quarter, cross-payer differences in DES use. RESULTS: Coronary stent patients with Medicaid or without insurance were significantly less likely to receive DES than were patients with private insurance throughout the study period. The differences fluctuated over time as the popularity of DES relative to BMS increased and decreased. The within-hospital gaps paralleled the overall differences, and were largest in Q3 2003 (Medicaid: 11.9, uninsured: 10.9% points) and Q4 2008 (Medicaid: 12.8, uninsured: 20.7% points), and smallest in Q4 2004 (Medicaid: 1.4, uninsured: 1.1% points). The between-hospital adjusted differences in DES use by payer were small and rarely significant. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial differences in DES use by payer within hospitals, suggesting physicians selected the new technology for patients in a manner associated with patients' payer type.

Who is missing from the measures? Trends in the proportion and treatment of patients potentially excluded from publicly reported quality measures.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services provides public reporting on the quality of hospital care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Core Measures allow discretion in excluding patients because of relative contraindications to aspirin, ß-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We describe trends in the proportion of patients with AMI with contraindications that could lead to discretionary exclusion from public reporting. METHODS: We completed cross-sectional analyses of 3 nationally representative data cohorts of AMI admissions among Medicare patients in 1994-1995 (n = 170,928), 1998-1999 (n = 27,432), and 2000-2001 (n = 27,300) from the national Medicare quality improvement projects. Patients were categorized as ineligible (eg, transfer patients), automatically excluded (specified absolute medical contraindications), discretionarily excluded (potentially excluded based on relative contraindications), or "ideal" for treatment for each measure. RESULTS: For 4 of 5 measures, the percentage of discretionarily excluded patients increased over the 3 periods (admission aspirin 15.8% to 16.9%, admission ß-blocker 14.3% to 18.3%, discharge aspirin 10.3% to 12.3%, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors 2.8% to 3.9%; P < .001). Of patients potentially included in measures (those who were not ineligible or automatically excluded), the discretionarily excluded represented 25.5% to 69.2% in 2000-2001. Treatment rates among patients with discretionary exclusions also increased for 4 of 5 measures (all except angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors). CONCLUSIONS: A sizeable and growing proportion of patients with AMI have relative contraindications to treatments that may result in discretionary exclusion from publicly reported quality measures. These patients represent a large population for which there is insufficient evidence as to whether measure exclusion or inclusion and treatment represents best care.

Health care insurance, financial concerns in accessing care, and delays to hospital presentation in acute myocardial infarction.

CONTEXT: Little is known about how health insurance status affects decisions to seek care during emergency medical conditions such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between lack of health insurance and financial concerns about accessing care among those with health insurance, and the time from symptom onset to hospital presentation (prehospital delays) during AMI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, prospective study using a registry of 3721 AMI patients enrolled between April 11, 2005, and December 31, 2008, at 24 US hospitals. Health insurance status was categorized as insured without financial concerns, insured but have financial concerns about accessing care, and uninsured. Insurance information was determined from medical records while financial concerns among those with health insurance were determined from structured interviews. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Prehospital delay times (< or = 2 hours, > 2-6 hours, or > 6 hours), adjusted for demographic, clinical, and social and psychological factors using hierarchical ordinal regression models. RESULTS: Of 3721 patients, 2294 were insured without financial concerns (61.7%), 689 were insured but had financial concerns about accessing care (18.5%), and 738 were uninsured (19.8%). Uninsured and insured patients with financial concerns were more likely to delay seeking care during AMI and had prehospital delays of greater than 6 hours among 48.6% of uninsured patients and 44.6% of insured patients with financial concerns compared with only 39.3% of insured patients without financial concerns. Prehospital delays of less than 2 hours during AMI occurred among 36.6% of those insured without financial concerns compared with 33.5% of insured patients with financial concerns and 27.5% of uninsured patients (P < .001). After adjusting for potential confounders, prehospital delays were associated with insured patients with financial concerns (adjusted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.41]; P = .01) and with uninsured patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.38 [95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.63]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Lack of health insurance and financial concerns about accessing care among those with health insurance were each associated with delays in seeking emergency care for AMI.

Influence of patient race on physician prescribing decisions: a randomized on-line experiment.

BACKGROUND: Prior research reports black patients have lower medication use for hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patient race influences physicians' prescribing. DESIGN: Web-based survey including three clinical vignettes (hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, diabetes), with patient race (black, white) randomized across vignettes. SUBJECTS: A total of 716 respondents from 5,141 eligible sampled primary care physicians (14% response rate). INTERVENTIONS: None MEASUREMENTS: Medication recommendation (any medication vs none, on-patent branded vs generic, and therapeutic class) and physicians' treatment adherence forecast (10-point Likert scale, 1-definitely not adhere, 10-definitely adhere). RESULTS: Respondents randomized to view black patients (n = 371) and white patients (n = 345) recommend any medications at comparable rates for hypercholesterolemia (100.0% white vs 99.5% black, P = 0.50), hypertension (99.7% white vs 99.5% black, P = 1.00), and diabetes (99.7% white vs 99.7% black, P = 1.00). Patient race influenced medication class chosen in the hypertension vignette; respondents randomized to view black patients recommended calcium channel blockers more often (20.8% black vs 3.2% white) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors less often (47.4% black vs 62.6% white) (P < 0.001). Patient race did not influence medication class for hypercholesterolemia or diabetes. Respondents randomized to view black patients reported lower forecasted patient adherence for hypertension (P < 0.001, mean: 7.3 black vs 7.7 white) and diabetes (P = 0.05 mean: 7.4 black vs 7.6 white), but race had no meaningful influence on forecasted adherence for hypercholesterolemia (P = 0.15, mean: 7.2 black vs 7.3 white). CONCLUSION: Racial differences in outpatient prescribing patterns for hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes are likely attributable to factors other than prescribing decisions based on patient race.

Association of physician certification and outcomes among patients receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

CONTEXT: Allowing nonelectrophysiologists to perform implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) procedures is controversial. However, it is not known whether outcomes of ICD implantation vary by physician specialty. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of implanting physician certification with outcomes following ICD implantation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective cohort study using cases submitted to the ICD Registry performed between January 2006 and June 2007. Patients were grouped by the certification status of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialists. Hierarchical logistic regression models were developed to determine the independent association of physician certification with outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital procedural complication rates and the proportion of patients meeting criteria for a defibrillator with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) who received that device. RESULTS: Of 111,293 ICD implantations included in the analysis, 78,857 (70.9%) were performed by electrophysiologists, 24,399 (21.9%) by nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1862 (1.7%) by thoracic surgeons, and 6175 (5.5%) by other specialists. Compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by electrophysiologists, patients whose ICD was implanted by either nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists or thoracic surgeons were at increased risk of complications in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 3.5% [2743/78,857]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 4.0% [970/24,399]; thoracic surgeons, 5.8% [108/1862]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (relative risk [RR] for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1.11 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01-1.21]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.15-1.79]). Among 35,841 patients who met criteria for CRT-D, those whose ICD was implanted by physicians other than electrophysiologists were significantly less likely to receive a CRT-D device compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 83.1% [21 303/25,635]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 75.8% [5950/7849]; thoracic surgeons, 57.8% [269/465]; other specialists, 74.8% [1416/1892]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (RR for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.91-0.95]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.88]; RR for other specialists, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-0.99]). CONCLUSIONS: In this registry, nonelectrophysiologists implanted 29% of ICDs. Overall, implantations by a nonelectrophysiologist were associated with a higher risk of procedural complications and lower likelihood of receiving a CRT-D device when indicated compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist.

Racial differences in survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

CONTEXT: Racial differences in survival have not been previously studied after in-hospital cardiac arrest, an event for which access to care is not likely to influence treatment. OBJECTIVES: To estimate racial differences in survival for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrests and examine the association of sociodemographic and clinical factors and the admitting hospital with racial differences in survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Cohort study of 10,011 patients with cardiac arrests due to ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia enrolled between January 1, 2000, and February 29, 2008, at 274 hospitals within the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival to hospital discharge; successful resuscitation from initial arrest and postresuscitation survival (secondary outcome measures). RESULTS: Included were 1883 black patients (18.8%) and 8128 white patients (81.2%). Rates of survival to discharge were lower for black patients (25.2%) than for white patients (37.4%) (unadjusted relative rate [RR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.79). Unadjusted racial differences narrowed after adjusting for patient characteristics (adjusted RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.75-0.88]; P < .001) and diminished further after additional adjustment for hospital site (adjusted RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.82-0.96]; P = .002). Lower rates of survival to discharge for blacks reflected lower rates of both successful resuscitation (55.8% vs 67.4% for whites; unadjusted RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.81-0.88]) and postresuscitation survival (45.2% vs 55.5% for whites; unadjusted RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.79-0.91]). Adjustment for the hospital site at which patients received care explained a substantial portion of the racial differences in successful resuscitation (adjusted RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.96]; P < .001) and eliminated the racial differences in postresuscitation survival (adjusted RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.92-1.06]; P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest were significantly less likely to survive to discharge than white patients, with lower rates of survival during both the immediate resuscitation and postresuscitation periods. Much of the racial difference was associated with the hospital center in which black patients received care.

Sex and racial differences in the management of acute myocardial infarction, 1994 through 2002.

BACKGROUND: Although increased attention has been paid to sex and racial differences in the management of myocardial infarction, it is unknown whether these differences have narrowed over time. METHODS: With the use of data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction, we examined sex and racial differences in the treatment of patients who were deemed to be "ideal candidates" for particular treatments and in deaths among 598,911 patients hospitalized with myocardial infarction between 1994 and 2002. RESULTS: In the unadjusted analysis, sex and racial differences were observed for rates of reperfusion therapy (for white men, white women, black men, and black women: 86.5, 83.3, 80.4, and 77.8 percent, respectively; P<0.001), use of aspirin (84.4, 78.7, 83.7, and 78.4 percent, respectively; P<0.001), use of beta-blockers (66.6, 62.9, 67.8, and 64.5 percent; P<0.001), and coronary angiography (69.1, 55.9, 64.0, and 55.0 percent; P<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, racial and sex differences persisted for rates of reperfusion therapy (risk ratio for white women, black men, and black women: 0.97, 0.91, and 0.89, respectively, as compared with white men) and coronary angiography (relative risk, 0.91, 0.82, and 0.76) but were attenuated for the use of aspirin (risk ratio, 0.97, 0.98, and 0.94) and beta-blockers (risk ratio, 0.98, 1.00, and 0.96); all risks were unchanged over time. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was similar among white women (risk ratio, 1.05; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.07) and black men (risk ratio, 0.95; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.00), as compared with white men, but was higher among black women (risk ratio, 1.11; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.06 to 1.16) and was unchanged over time. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of reperfusion therapy, coronary angiography, and in-hospital death after myocardial infarction, but not the use of aspirin and beta-blockers, vary according to race and sex, with no evidence that the differences have narrowed in recent years.

Standards for statistical models used for public reporting of health outcomes: an American Heart Association Scientific Statement from the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Writing Group: cosponsored by the Council on Epidemiology and Prevention and the Stroke Council. Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

With the proliferation of efforts to report publicly the outcomes of healthcare providers and institutions, there is a growing need to define standards for the methods that are being employed. An interdisciplinary writing group identified 7 preferred attributes of statistical models used for publicly reported outcomes. These attributes include (1) clear and explicit definition of an appropriate patient sample, (2) clinical coherence of model variables, (3) sufficiently high-quality and timely data, (4) designation of an appropriate reference time before which covariates are derived and after which outcomes are measured, (5) use of an appropriate outcome and a standardized period of outcome assessment, (6) application of an analytical approach that takes into account the multilevel organization of data, and (7) disclosure of the methods used to compare outcomes, including disclosure of performance of risk-adjustment methodology in derivation and validation samples.

Sex-based differences in the effect of digoxin for the treatment of heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The Digitalis Investigation Group trial reported that treatment with digoxin did not decrease overall mortality among patients with heart failure and depressed left ventricular systolic function, although it did reduce hospitalizations slightly. Even though the epidemiologic features, causes, and prognosis of heart failure vary between men and women, sex-based differences in the effect of digoxin were not evaluated. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc subgroup analysis to assess whether there were sex-based differences in the effect of digoxin therapy among the 6800 patients in the Digitalis Investigation Group study. The presence of an interaction between sex and digoxin therapy with respect to the primary end point of death from any cause was evaluated with the use of Mantel-Haenszel tests of heterogeneity and a multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: There was an absolute difference of 5.8 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 0.5 to 11.1) between men and women in the effect of digoxin on the rate of death from any cause (P=0.034 for the interaction). Specifically, women who were randomly assigned to digoxin had a higher rate of death than women who were randomly assigned to placebo (33.1 percent vs. 28.9 percent; absolute difference, 4.2 percent, 95 percent confidence interval, -0.5 to 8.8). In contrast, the rate of death was similar among men randomly assigned to digoxin and men randomly assigned to placebo (35.2 percent vs. 36.9 percent; absolute difference, -1.6 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -4.2 to 1.0). In the multivariable analysis, digoxin was associated with a significantly higher risk of death among women (adjusted hazard ratio for the comparison with placebo, 1.23; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.47), but it had no significant effect among men (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.02; P=0.014 for the interaction). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of digoxin therapy differs between men and women. Digoxin therapy is associated with an increased risk of death from any cause among women, but not men, with heart failure and depressed left ventricular systolic function.

Socioeconomic disparities in outcomes after acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients of low socioeconomic status (SES) have higher mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Little is known about the underlying mechanisms or the relationship between SES and rehospitalization after AMI. METHODS: We analyzed data from the PREMIER observational study, which included 2142 patients hospitalized with AMI from 18 US hospitals. Socioeconomic status was measured by self-reported household income and education level. Sequential multivariable modeling assessed the relationship of socioeconomic factors with 1-year all-cause mortality and all-cause rehospitalization after adjustment for demographics, clinical factors, and quality-of-care measures. RESULTS: Both household income and education level were associated with higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio 2.80, 95% CI 1.37-5.72, lowest to highest income group) and rehospitalization after AMI (hazard ratio 1.55, 95% CI 1.17-2.05). Patients with low SES had worse clinical status at admission and received poorer quality of care. In multivariable modeling, the relationship between household income and mortality was attenuated by adjustment for demographic and clinical factors (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.54-2.62), with a further small decrement in the hazard ratio after adjustment for quality of care. The relationship between income and rehospitalization was only partly attenuated by demographic and clinical factors (hazard ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.01-1.89) and was not influenced by adjustment for quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' baseline clinical status largely explained the relationship between SES and mortality, but not rehospitalization, among patients with AMI.

Impact of delay in door-to-needle time on mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Fibrinolytic therapy is the most common reperfusion strategy for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), particularly in smaller centers. Previous studies evaluated the relation between time to treatment and outcomes when few patients were treated within 30 minutes of hospital arrival and many did not receive modern adjunctive medications. To quantify the impact of a delay in door-to-needle time on mortality in a recent and representative cohort of patients with STEMI, a cohort of 62,470 patients with STEMI treated using fibrinolytic therapy at 973 hospitals that participated in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction from 1999 to 2002 was analyzed. Hierarchical models were used to evaluate the independent effect of door-to-needle time on in-hospital mortality. In-hospital mortality was lower with shorter door-to-needle times (2.9% for < or =30 minutes, 4.1% for 31 to 45 minutes, and 6.2% for >45 minutes; p <0.001 for trend). Compared with those experiencing door-to-needle times < or =30 minutes, adjusted odd ratios (ORs) of dying were 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 1.31) and 1.37 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.52; p for trend <0.001) for patients with door-to-needle times of 31 to 45 and >45 minutes, respectively. This relation was particularly pronounced in those presenting within 1 hour of symptom onset to presentation time (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.54; OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.87, respectively; p for trend <0.001). In conclusion, timely administration of fibrinolytic therapy continues to significantly impact on mortality in the modern era, particularly in patients presenting early after symptom onset.

Serum urea nitrogen, creatinine, and estimators of renal function: mortality in older patients with cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Renal dysfunction predicts increased mortality in cardiovascular patients, but the best renal estimator for quantifying risks is uncertain. We compared admission serum urea nitrogen (SUN) level, creatinine level, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) rate, and Mayo estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for predicting mortality. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of Medicare patients (aged > or = 65 years) hospitalized for myocardial infarction (n = 44,437) and heart failure (n = 56,652), renal estimators were compared for linearity with 1-year mortality risk, magnitude of risk, and relative importance for predicting risk (percentage variance explained) in proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The SUN level, creatinine level, and Mayo eGFR had linear associations with mortality. These measures predicted steadily increased risk in patients who experienced a myocardial infarction with a SUN level greater than 17 mg/dL (> 6.1 mmol/L), a creatinine level greater than 1.0 mg/dL (> 88.4 micromol/L), and a Mayo eGFR of less than 100 mL/min per 1.73 m2; and in patients who experienced heart failure with a SUN level greater than 16 mg/dL (> 5.7 mmol/L), a creatinine level greater than 1.1 mg/dL (> 97.2 micromol/L), and a Mayo eGFR of 90 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or less. In contrast, the MDRD eGFR had a J-shaped association and failed to identify increased risks in 50.0% of patients who experienced a myocardial infarction (with an MDRD eGFR > 55 mL/min per 1.73 m2) and 60.0% of patients who experienced heart failure (with an MDRD eGFR > 44 mL/min per 1.73 m2). The SUN level and Mayo eGFR had the greatest magnitude of risks. In myocardial infarction and heart failure patients, adjusted mortality increased by 3% and 7%, respectively, per 5-U increase in SUN, and by 3% and 9%, respectively, per 10-U decrease in Mayo eGFR (P<.001), based on models including both renal measures. Of all the measures, SUN had the greatest magnitude of relative importance for predicting mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In older cardiovascular patients, SUN- and creatinine-based measures were powerful predictors of postdischarge mortality. Only MDRD eGFR was less adequate in quantifying risks for patients with mild impairment. Novel estimators, such as the Mayo eGFR, may play an important role in outcomes' prognostication for these patients.

Adoption of spironolactone therapy for older patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in the United States, 1998-2001.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised about the appropriateness of spironolactone use in some patients with heart failure. We studied the adoption of spironolactone therapy after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) in national cohorts of older patients hospitalized for heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a study of serial cross-sectional samples of Medicare beneficiaries > or =65 years old discharged after hospitalization for the primary diagnosis of heart failure and with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The first sample was discharged before (April 1998 to March 1999, n=9758) and the second sample after (July 2000 to June 2001, n=9468) publication of RALES in September 1999. We assessed spironolactone prescriptions at hospital discharge in patient groups defined by enrollment criteria for the trial. Using multivariable logistic regression, we identified factors independently associated with prescriptions not meeting these criteria. Spironolactone use increased >7-fold (3.0% to 21.3% P<0.0001) after RALES. Of patients meeting enrollment criteria, 24.1% received spironolactone, as compared with 17.4% of those not meeting the criteria. Of all prescriptions after RALES, 30.9% were provided to patients not meeting enrollment criteria. Spironolactone was prescribed to 22.8% of patients with a serum potassium value > or =5.0 mmol/L, to 14.1% with a serum creatinine value > or =2.5 mg/dL, and to 17.3% with severe renal dysfunction (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL.min(-1).1.73 m(-2)). In multivariable analyses, factors associated with prescriptions not meeting enrollment criteria included advanced age, noncardiovascular comorbidities, discharge to skilled nursing facilities, and care provided by physicians without board certification. CONCLUSIONS: Spironolactone prescriptions increased markedly after the publication of RALES, and many treated patients were at risk for hyperkalemia. Simultaneously, many patients who might have benefited were not treated. These findings demonstrate the importance of balancing efforts to enhance use among appropriate patients and minimizing use in patients at risk for adverse events.

Race and renal impairment in heart failure: mortality in blacks versus whites.

BACKGROUND: Renal impairment is an emerging prognostic indicator in heart failure (HF) patients. Despite known racial differences in the progression of both HF and renal disease, it is unclear whether the prognosis for renal impairment in HF patients differs by race. We sought to determine in HF patients the 1-year mortality risks associated with elevated creatinine and impaired estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and to quantify racial differences in mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively evaluated the National Heart Care Project nationally representative cohort of 53,640 Medicare patients hospitalized with HF. Among 5669 black patients, mean creatinine was 1.6+/-0.9 mg/dL, and 54% had an eGFR < or =60, compared with creatinine 1.5+/-0.7 mg/dL and 68% eGFR < or =60 in 47,971 white patients. Higher creatinine predicted increased mortality risk, although the magnitude of risk differed by race (interaction P=0.0001). Every increase in creatinine of 0.5 mg/dL was associated with a >10% increased risk in adjusted mortality for blacks, compared with >15% increased risk in whites (interaction P=0.0001), with the most striking racial disparities at the highest levels of renal impairment. Depressed eGFR showed similar racial differences (interaction P=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Impaired renal function predicts increased mortality in elderly HF patients, although risks are more pronounced in whites. Distinct morbidity and mortality burdens in black versus white patients underscore the importance of improving patient risk-stratification, defining optimal therapies, and exploring physiological underpinnings of racial differences.

Admission glucose and mortality in elderly patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction: implications for patients with and without recognized diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between admission glucose levels and outcomes in older diabetic and nondiabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction is not well defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated a national sample of elderly patients (n=141,680) hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction from 1994 to 1996. Admission glucose was analyzed as a categorical (< or =110, >110 to 140, >140 to 170, >170 to 240, >240 mg/dL) and continuous variable for its association with mortality in patients with and without recognized diabetes. A substantial proportion of hyperglycemic patients (eg, 26% of those with glucose >240 mg/dL) did not have recognized diabetes. Fewer hyperglycemic patients without known diabetes received insulin during hospitalization than diabetics with similar glucose levels (eg, glucose >240 mg/dL, 22% versus 73%; P<0.001). Higher glucose levels were associated with greater risk of 30-day mortality in patients without known diabetes (for glucose range from < or =110 to >240 mg/dL, 10% to 39%) compared with diabetics (range, 16% to 24%; P for interaction <0.001). After multivariable adjustment, higher glucose levels continued to be associated with a graded increase in 30-day mortality in patients without known diabetes (referent, glucose < or =110 mg/dL; range from glucose >110 to 140 mg/dL: hazard ratio [HR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.24; to glucose >240 mg/dL: HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.75 to 2.00). In contrast, among diabetic patients, greater mortality risk was observed only in those with glucose >240 mg/dL (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.50 versus glucose < or =110 mg/dL; P for interaction <0.001). One-year mortality results were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated glucose is common, rarely treated, and associated with increased mortality risk in elderly acute myocardial infarction patients, particularly those without recognized diabetes.

Socioeconomic status, treatment, and outcomes among elderly patients hospitalized with heart failure: findings from the National Heart Failure Project.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have reported conflicting findings concerning the association of socioeconomic status (SES), treatment, and outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical record data from a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with HF between March 1998 and April 1999 (n = 25,086) to assess the association of patient SES, treatment, and outcomes. Patients' SES was designated as lower, lower-middle, higher-middle, and higher using residential ZIP code characteristics. Patients were evaluated for left ventricular systolic function assessment, prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge, readmission within 1 year of discharge, and mortality within 30 days and 1 year of admission. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to assess the association of SES, quality of care, and outcomes adjusting for patient, physician, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Lower SES patients (relative risk [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.96) were modestly less likely to have had a left ventricular systolic function assessment, but had a similar adjusted likelihood of being prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.11) compared with higher SES patients after multivariable adjustment. Socioeconomic status was not associated with 30-day mortality after multivariable adjustment, but lower SES patients had a higher risk of 1-year mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19) and readmission within 1 year of discharge (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.03-1.12) compared with higher SES patients. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic status in patients hospitalized with HF was not strongly associated with quality of care or 30-day mortality. However, the increased risk of 1-year mortality and readmission among patients of lower SES suggest SES may influence outcomes after hospitalization for HF.

Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors in older persons with acute myocardial infarction: evidence for an age-statin interaction.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the relationship between hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and outcomes in older persons with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the United States from April 1998 to June 2001. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare patients aged 65 and older with a principal discharge diagnosis of AMI (N=65,020) who did and did not receive a discharge prescription for statins. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality at 3 years after discharge. RESULTS: Of 23,013 patients with AMI assessed, 5,513 (24.0%) were receiving a statin at discharge. Nearly 40% of eligible patients (n=8,452) were aged 80 and older, of whom 1,310 (15.5%) were receiving a statin at discharge. In a multivariable model taking into account demographic, clinical, physician and hospital characteristics, and propensity score, discharge statin therapy was associated with significantly lower 3-year mortality (hazard ratio (HR)=0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.83-0.96)). In an analysis stratified by age, discharge statins were associated with lower mortality in patients younger than 80 (HR=0.84, 95% CI=0.76-0.92) but not in those aged 80 and older (HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.87-1.09). CONCLUSION: Statin therapy is associated with lower mortality in older patients with AMI younger than 80 but not in those aged 80 and older, as a group. This finding questions whether statin efficacy data in younger patients can be broadly applied to the very old and indicates the need for further study of this group.

Physician board certification and the care and outcomes of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients and purchasers prefer board-certified physicians, but whether these physicians provide better quality of care and outcomes for hospitalized patients is unclear. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether care by board-certified physicians after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was associated with higher use of clinical guideline recommended therapies and lower 30-day mortality. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We examined 101,251 Medicare patients hospitalized for AMI in the United States and compared use of aspirin, beta-blockers, and 30-day mortality according to the attending physicians' board certification in family practice, internal medicine, or cardiology. RESULTS: Board-certified family practitioners had slightly higher use of aspirin (admission: 51.1% vs 46.0%; discharge: 72.2% vs 63.9%) and beta-blockers (admission: 44.1% vs 37.1%; discharge: 46.2% vs 38.7%) than nonboard-certified family practitioners. There was a similar pattern in board-certified Internists for aspirin (admission: 53.7% vs 49.6%; discharge: 78.2% vs 68.8%) and beta-blockers (admission: 48.9% vs 44.1%; discharge: 51.2% vs 47.1). Board-certified cardiologists had higher use of aspirin compared with cardiologists certified in internal medicine only or without any board certification (admission: 61.3% vs 53.1% vs 52.1%; discharge: 82.2% vs 71.8% vs 71.5%) and beta-blockers (admission: 52.9% vs 49.6% vs 41.5%; discharge: 54.7% vs 50.6% vs 42.5%). In multivariate regression analyses, board certification was not associated with differences in 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment by a board-certified physician was associated with modestly higher quality of care for AMI, but not differences in mortality. Regardless of board certification, all physicians had opportunities to improve quality of care for AMI.