Telehealth during COVID-19 restrictions in patients with cardiovascular disease: impact on medication prescriptions and patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Telehealth plays an integral part in healthcare delivery. The impact of telehealth and the COVID-19 pandemic on medication prescribing and patient satisfaction with telehealth in cardiology clinics remains unknown. METHODS: A retrospective study of cardiology clinic patients at an Australian tertiary hospital was conducted; 630 patients seen before the COVID-19 pandemic (0.6% telehealth) and 678 during the pandemic (91.2% telehealth) were included. Medication changes, new prescriptions and time to obtaining prescriptions after clinic were compared. To evaluate patients' experiences, cardiology clinic patients reviewed during the pandemic were prospectively invited to participate in an electronic survey sent to their mobile phones. RESULTS: The overall rates of medication changes made in the clinic between the prepandemic and the pandemic periods did not differ significantly (26.9% vs 25.8%). Compared with prepandemic, new cardiac medication prescriptions during clinic were significantly less (9.3% vs 2.5%; P < 0.0001) and recommendations to general practitioners (GP) to initiate cardiac medications were significantly more (2.6% vs 9.1%; P < 0.0001). Time to obtaining new prescriptions was significantly longer in the pandemic cohort (median 0 days (range: 0-32) vs 10.5 days (range: 0-231); P < 0.0001). Two hundred forty-three (32.7%) patients participated in the survey; 50% reported that telehealth was at least as good as face-to-face consultations. Most patients (61.5%) were satisfied with telehealth and most (62.9%) wished to see telehealth continued postpandemic. CONCLUSION: Telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with greater reliance on GP to prescribe cardiac medications and delays in obtaining prescriptions among cardiology clinic patients. Although most patients were satisfied with telehealth services, nearly half of the cardiac patients expressed preference towards traditional face-to-face consultations.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Young Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Without Standard Modifiable Risk Factors.

Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with no standard modifiable risk factors (SMuRFs: hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia, and smoking) have worse short-term mortality than those with SMuRFs. Whether this association extends to younger patients is unclear. A retrospective cohort study was performed of patients aged 18 to 45 years with STEMI at 3 Australian hospitals between 2010 and 2020. Nonatherosclerotic causes of STEMI were excluded. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included 1 and 2-year mortality. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used. Of 597 patients, the median age was 42 (interquartile range 38 to 44) years, 85.1% were men and 8.4% were SMuRF-less. Patients who are SMuRF-less were >2 times more likely to have cardiac arrest (28.0% vs 12.6%, p = 0.003); require vasopressors (16.0% vs 6.8%, p = 0.018), mechanical support (10.0% vs 2.3%, p = 0.046), or intensive care admission (20.0% vs 5.7%, p <0.001); and have higher rate of left anterior descending artery infarcts than those with SMuRFs (62.0% vs 47.2%, p = 0.045). No significant differences in thrombolysis or percutaneous intervention were observed. Guideline-directed medical therapy at discharge was high (>90%), and not different in the SMuRF-less. 30-day mortality was almost fivefold higher in the SMuRF-less (hazard ratio 4.70, 95% confidence interval 1.66 to 13.35, p = 0.004), remaining significant at 1 and 2 years. In conclusion, young patients who are SMuRF-less have a higher 30-day mortality after STEMI than their counterparts with SMuRFs. This may be partially mediated by higher rates of cardiac arrest and left anterior descending artery territory events. These findings further highlight the need for improved prevention and management of SMuRF-less STEMI.