RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To identify variation in the rates of use of key evidence-based therapies and in clinical outcomes among patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data on care processes and clinical outcomes of representative patient samples recorded by the Queensland Health Cardiac Collaborative registry. SETTING: 18 public hospitals (3 tertiary, 15 non-tertiary) in Queensland, August 2001 to December 2003. STUDY POPULATION: 2156 patients who died or were discharged after troponin-positive ACS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of proportions of highly eligible patients receiving indicated care and in-hospital mortality between subgroups categorised by age, sex, comorbidities (diabetes, renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and mental disorder), type of admitting hospital (tertiary or non-tertiary), and cardiologist involvement (transfer or non-transfer to cardiology unit). RESULTS: Patients aged > or = 65 years were less likely than younger patients to receive heparin (79% v 87%), beta-blockers (79% v 87%), lipid-lowering agents (78% v 87%), coronary angiography (51% v 66%), and referral to cardiac rehabilitation (17% v 33%). Patients with diabetes were less likely than others to receive coronary angiography (50% v 63%), while those with moderate to severe renal failure were less likely to receive thrombolysis (52% v 84%), heparin (71% v 83%), beta-blockers (69% v 84%), lipid-lowering agents (61% v 84%), in-hospital cardiac counselling (46% v 64%) and referral to cardiac rehabilitation (9% v 25%). Patients admitted to tertiary hospitals were more likely than those admitted to non-tertiary hospitals to receive coronary angiography (85% v 55%) and referral to cardiac rehabilitation (36% v 21%). Risk-adjusted mortality was highest in patients with moderate to severe renal failure (15% v 3%) and older patients (6% v 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Variations exist in the provision of indicated care to patients with ACS according to age, diabetic status, renal function and type of admitting hospital. Excess mortality in elderly patients and in those with advanced renal disease may be partially attributable to failure to use key therapies.
Asunto(s)
Angina Inestable/terapia , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/uso terapéutico , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Angina Inestable/epidemiología , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Australia/epidemiología , Comorbilidad , Angiografía Coronaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Consejo/estadística & datos numéricos , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Utilización de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales Públicos , Humanos , Hipolipemiantes/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Readmisión del Paciente , Transferencia de Pacientes , Complejo GPIIb-IIIa de Glicoproteína Plaquetaria/antagonistas & inhibidores , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Insuficiencia Renal/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores SexualesRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in quality of in-hospital care of patients with either acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or congestive heart failure (CHF) admitted to hospitals participating in a multisite quality improvement collaboration. DESIGN: Before-and-after study of changes in quality indicators measured on representative patient samples between June 2001 and January 2003. SETTING: Nine public hospitals in Queensland. STUDY POPULATIONS: Consecutive or randomly selected patients admitted to study hospitals during the baseline period (June 2001 to January 2002; n = 807 for ACS, n = 357 for CHF) and post-intervention period (July 2002 to January 2003; n = 717 for ACS, n = 220 for CHF). INTERVENTION: Provision of comparative baseline feedback at a facilitative workshop combined with hospital-specific quality-improvement interventions supported by on-site quality officers and a central program management group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Changes in process-of-care indicators between baseline and post-intervention periods. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, more patients with ACS in the post-intervention period received therapeutic heparin regimens (84% v 72%; P < 0.001), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (64% v 56%; P = 0.02), lipid-lowering agents (72% v 62%; P < 0.001), early use of coronary angiography (52% v 39%; P < 0.001), in-hospital cardiac counselling (65% v 43%; P < 0.001), and referral to cardiac rehabilitation (15% v 5%; P < 0.001). The numbers of patients with CHF receiving beta-blockers also increased (52% v 34%; P < 0.001), with fewer patients receiving deleterious agents (13% v 23%; P = 0.04). Same-cause 30-day readmission rate decreased from 7.2% to 2.4% (P = 0.02) in patients with CHF. CONCLUSION: Quality-improvement interventions conducted as multisite collaborations may improve in-hospital care of acute cardiac conditions within relatively short time frames.