Association of US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital 30-Day Risk-Standardized Readmission Metric With Care Quality and Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Findings From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry/Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines.

Importance: The US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program penalizes hospitals with higher-than-expected risk-adjusted 30-day readmission rates (excess readmission ratio [ERR] > 1) after acute myocardial infarction (MI). However, the association of ERR with MI care processes and outcomes are not well established. Objective: To evaluate the association between ERR for MI with in-hospital process of care measures and 1-year clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational analysis of hospitalized patients with MI from National Cardiovascular Data Registry/Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines centers subject to the first cycle of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2011. Exposures: The ERR for MI (MI-ERR) in 2011. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adherence to process of care measures during index hospitalization in the overall study population and risk of the composite outcome of mortality or all-cause readmission within 1 year of discharge and its individual components among participants with available Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked data. Results: The median ages of patients in the MI-ERR greater than 1 and tertiles 1, 2, and 3 of the MI-ERR greater than 1 groups were 64, 63, 64, and 63 years, respectively. Among 380 hospitals that treated a total of 176 644 patients with MI during the study period, 43% had MI-ERR greater than 1. The proportions of patients of black race, those with heart failure signs at admission, and bleeding complications increased with higher MI-ERR. There was no significant association between adherence to MI performance measures and MI-ERR (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81-1.08, per 0.1-unit increase in MI-ERR for overall defect-free care). Among the 51 453 patients with 1-year outcomes data available, higher MI-ERR was associated with higher adjusted risk of the composite outcome and all-cause readmission within 1 year of discharge. This association was largely driven by readmissions early after discharge and was not significant in landmark analyses beginning 30 days after discharge. The MI-ERR was not associated with risk for mortality within 1 year of discharge in the overall and 30-day landmark analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: During the first cycle of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, participating hospitals' risk-adjusted 30-day readmission rates following MI were not associated with in-hospital quality of MI care or clinical outcomes occurring after the first 30 days after discharge.

Contemporary patterns of discharge aspirin dosing after acute myocardial infarction in the United States: results from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR).

BACKGROUND: Accumulated data suggest that low-dose aspirin after myocardial infarction (MI) may offer similar efficacy to higher dose aspirin with reduced risk of bleeding. Few data are available on contemporary aspirin dosing patterns after MI in the United States METHODS AND RESULTS: Aspirin dosing from 221 199 patients with MI (40.2% ST-segment-elevation MI) from 525 US hospitals enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's (NCDR's) Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get with the Guidelines were described, overall and in clinically relevant subgroups. High-dose aspirin was defined as 325 mg and low dose as 81 mg. Between January 2007 and March 2011, 60.9% of patients with acute MI were discharged on high-dose aspirin, 35.6% on low-dose aspirin, and 3.5% on other doses. High-dose aspirin was prescribed at discharge to 73.0% of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and 44.6% of patients managed medically. Among 9075 patients discharged on aspirin, thienopyridine, and warfarin, 44.0% were prescribed high-dose aspirin. Patients with an in-hospital major bleeding event were also frequently discharged on high-dose aspirin (56.7%). A 25-fold variation in the proportion prescribed high-dose aspirin at discharge was observed across participating centers. CONCLUSIONS: Most US patients with MI continue to be discharged on high-dose aspirin. Although aspirin dosing after percutaneous coronary intervention largely reflected prevailing guidelines before 2012, high-dose aspirin was prescribed with similar frequency in medically managed patients and to those in categories expected to be at high risk for bleeding. Wide variability in the proportional use of high-dose aspirin across centers suggests significant influence from local practice habits and uncertainty about appropriate aspirin dosing.

Variability of clopidogrel response in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The global prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) continues to climb, and is accompanied by an increase in DM associated complications, most often manifesting as coronary heart disease. Platelet dysfunction has been implicated as a central contributor to the increased risk of coronary artery disease in patients with DM, and it is not surprising that the anti-platelet agent, clopidogrel, has been shown to have efficacy in both short and long term outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, accumulating data suggest a clinically relevant sub-optimal clopidogrel response in some patients with DM. The exact mechanism of these observations is not yet fully understood, but appears to be related to reduced concentrations of circulating clopidogrel active metabolite, with less variability in pharmacodynamic and clinical response suggested by the evaluation of newer P2Y(12) antagonists, such as prasugrel and ticagrelor. More research is needed to better understand both the pharmacology and clinical consequences of these observations.