Glycosylated haemoglobin assessment in diabetic patients with acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) advocate for maintaining adequate long-term glycaemic control in diabetic patients. Glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement is commonly used to monitor long-term glycaemic control in diabetes. AIMS: To evaluate the frequency and clinical predictors of in-hospital HbA1c measurement in diabetic patients presenting with ACS and the relationship between HbA1c assessment and mortality following discharge. METHODS: This registry-based cohort study included 1743 diabetic patients from 33 representative hospitals across Australia with a final diagnosis of ACS. Independent predictors of HbA1c assessment were evaluated using a multivariable logistic generalised estimating equations analysis. The association between HbA1c assessment and mortality following discharge was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: Seven hundred and fourteen (41%) patients had HbA1c assessment during admission. Frequency of assessment varied markedly between hospitals (7.7-87.6%). HbA1c assessment was significantly more frequent in hospitals with catheterisation laboratories. Frequency of assessment was not associated with location of hospital (rural vs urban) or hospital capacity. Independent clinical predictors of HbA1c assessment across participating hospitals were younger age, ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction, cardiac catheterisation and coronary artery bypass surgery during admission. HbA1c assessment was associated with higher rates of coronary catheterisation, revascularisation and receipt of evidence-based medicines but not with mortality during 6 months following discharge (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-1.18). CONCLUSION: Frequency of HbA1c assessment varies markedly between hospitals, and most diabetic patients admitted for ACS in Australia do not receive assessment of pre-admission glycaemic control. HbA1c assessment was associated with better evidence driven medical care.

Comparison of the management and in-hospital outcomes of acute coronary syndrome patients in Australia and New Zealand: results from the binational SNAPSHOT acute coronary syndrome 2012 audit.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We aimed to assess differences in patient management, and outcomes, of Australian and New Zealand patients admitted with a suspected or confirmed acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: We used comprehensive data from the binational Australia and New Zealand ACS 'SNAPSHOT' audit, acquired on individual patients admitted between 00.00 h on 14 May 2012 to 24.00 h on 27 May 2012. RESULTS: There were 4387 patient admissions, 3381 (77%) in Australia and 1006 (23%) in New Zealand; Australian patients were slightly younger (67 vs 69 years, P = 0.0044). Of the 2356 patients with confirmed ACS, Australian patients were at a lower cardiovascular risk with a lower median Global Registry Acute Coronary Events score (147 vs 154 P = 0.0008), but as likely to receive an invasive coronary angiogram (58% vs 54%, P = 0.082), or revascularisation with percutaneous coronary intervention (32% vs 31%, P = 0.92) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (7.0% vs 5.6%, P = 0.32). Of the 1937 non-segment elevation myocardial infarction/unstable angina pectoris (NSTEMI/UAP) patients, Australian patients had a shorter time to angiography (46 h vs 67 h, P < 0.0001). However, at discharge, Australian NSTEMI/UAP survivors were less likely to receive aspirin (84% vs 89%, P = 0.0079, a second anti-platelet agent (57% vs 63%, P = 0.050) or a beta blocker (67% vs 77%, P = 0.0002). In-hospital death rates were not different (2.7% vs 3.2%, P = 0.55) between Australia and New Zealand. CONCLUSIONS: Overall more similarities were seen, than differences, in the management of suspected or confirmed ACS patients between Australia and New Zealand. However, in several management areas, both countries could improve the service delivery to this high-risk patient group.

The design and rationale of the Australian Cooperative National Registry of Acute Coronary care, Guideline Adherence and Clinical Events (CONCORDANCE).

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular observational registries characterise patients and describe the manner and use of therapeutic strategies. They facilitate analyses on the quality of care among participating institutions and document variations in clinical practice which can be benchmarked against best practice recommendations. The Cooperative National Registry of Acute Coronary care, Guideline Adherence and Clinical Events (CONCORDANCE) is an Australian observational registry that describes management and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and feeds back both performance and outcome measures to participating hospitals. METHODS: The CONCORDANCE registry has been designed within a comparative effectiveness research (CER) framework to collect and report data from hospitals located in geographically diverse regions of Australia. Information including patient demographics, presenting characteristics, past medical history, in-hospital management and outcomes at six months and two years are entered into a web-based database using an electronic clinical record form (eCRF). Individual hospital information is returned to the sites in a real time confidential report detailing information on key performance indicator (KPI) process measures and outcomes benchmarked against the aggregated study cohort. Governance rules ensure data security and protect patient and clinician confidentiality. Consistent with a CER framework, additional characteristics of the registry include: (a) the capacity to evaluate associations between the inter and intra hospital systems and the provision of evidence based care and outcomes, (b) ongoing data collection from representative hospitals which allow spatial and temporal analysis of change in practice and the application of treatment modalities in the real world setting and (c) the provision of a data spine for quality improvement strategies and practical clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The CONCORDANCE registry is a clinician-driven initiative describing clinical care for ACS patients admitted to Australian hospitals. The registry generates high quality data which is fed back to clinicians, and key stakeholders in ACS care. Using a CER approach, the registry describes the translation of randomised trial evidence into practice, and provides insights into strategies that could improve care and ultimately patient outcomes.

Acute coronary syndrome and stable coronary artery disease: are they so different? Long-term outcomes in a contemporary PCI cohort.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are known to have poorer short-term prognosis compared to stable coronary artery (CAD) patients undergoing elective PCI. Few studies have made direct comparison of long-term mortality between ACS and stable CAD patients undergoing PCI. The aim of our study was to compare the long-term mortality following PCI between patients with ACS and those with stable CAD. METHODS: We examined consecutive patients undergoing PCI with stenting at a tertiary referral hospital. Clinical, angiographic and biochemical data were collected and analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality retrieved from the Statewide Death Registry database. RESULTS: Included were 1923 consecutive PCI patients (970 stable CAD and 953 ACS). The mean follow-up time was 4.1 years ± 1.8 years. In-hospital mortality was 1.4% overall, seen exclusively in patients with ACS (n=28, 2.9%). Post-discharge mortality was 6.7% among patients with stable CAD and 10.5% for ACS (P<0.01). Multivariate predictors of post-discharge deaths for both groups included age (HR 1.08 per year, P<0.001) and impaired renal function (HR 2.49, P<0.001). Following adjustment for these factors, an ACS indication for PCI was not associated with greater post-discharge mortality (adjusted HR 1.18: 0.85-1.64, P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing PCI following an ACS have higher long-term mortality to those with stable CAD, which is potentially explained by a greater prevalence of comorbidities. This suggests that for the ACS population, contemporary interventional and medical management strategies may effectively and specifically counter the adverse prognostic impact of coronary instability and myocardial damage.