Uninterrupted Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients Undergoing Unplanned Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare interrupted and uninterrupted oral anticoagulant therapy (I-OAC vs. U-OAC) in patients on OAC undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding the optimal peri-procedural management of OAC-treated patients. METHODS: In the SWEDEHEART registry, all patients on OAC who were admitted acutely and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary angiography with a diagnostic procedure, from 2005 to 2017, were included. Outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and bleeds at 120 days. Propensity score was used to adjust for the nonrandomized treatment selection. RESULTS: The study included 6,485 patients: 3,322 in the I-OAC group and 3,163 in the U-OAC group. The cumulative incidence of MACCE was 8.2% (269 events) versus 8.2% (254 events) in the I-OAC and the U-OAC groups, respectively. The adjusted risk for MACCE did not differ between the groups (I-OAC vs. U-OAC hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.12). Similarly, no difference was found in the risk for MACCE or bleeds (12.6% vs. 12.9%, adjusted hazard ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 1.07). The risk for major or minor in-hospital bleeds did not differ between the groups. However, U-OAC was associated with a significantly shorter duration of hospitalization: 4 (3 to 7) days versus 5 (3 to 8) days; p < 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: I-OAC and U-OAC were associated with equivalent risk for MACCE and bleeding complications. An U-OAC strategy was associated with shorter length of hospitalization. These data support U-OAC as the preferable strategy in patients on OAC undergoing coronary intervention.

Interaction between tele-nurses and callers with an evolving myocardial infarction: Consequences for level of directed care.

BACKGROUND: Rapid contact with emergency medical services is imperative to save the lives of acute myocardial infarction patients. However, many patients turn to a telehealth advisory nurse instead, where the delivery of urgent and safe care largely depends on how the interaction in the call is established. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the interaction between tele-nurses and callers with an evolving myocardial infarction after contacting a national telehealth advisory service number as their first medical contact. METHOD: Twenty men and 10 women (aged 46-89 years) were included. Authentic calls were analysed using inductive content analysis. FINDINGS: One overall category, Movement towards directed level of care, labelled the whole interaction between the tele-nurse and the caller. Four categories conceptualised the different interactions: a distinct, reasoning, indecisive or irrational interaction. The interactions described how tele-nurses and callers assessed and elaborated on symptoms, context and actions. The interaction was pivotal for progress in the dialogue and affected the achievement of mutual understanding in the communicative process. An indecisive or irrational interaction could increase the risk of failing to recommend or call for acute care. CONCLUSION: The interaction in the communication could either lead or mislead the level of care directed in the call. This study adds new perspectives to the communicative process in the acute setting in order to identify a myocardial infarction and the level of urgency from both individuals experiencing myocardial infarction and professionals in the health system.