SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Timmis Adam) srt2:(2015-2019)"

Sökning: WFRF:(Timmis Adam) > (2015-2019)

  • Resultat 1-5 av 5
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  •  
2.
  • Dondo, Tatendashe B., et al. (författare)
  • beta-Blockers and Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Without Heart Failure or Ventricular Dysfunction
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 69:22, s. 2710-2720
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • <p>BACKGROUND: For acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without heart failure (HF), it is unclear if beta-blockers are associated with reduced mortality.</p><p>OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to determine the association between beta-blocker use and mortality in patients with AMI without HF or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).</p><p>METHODS: This cohort study used national English and Welsh registry data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project. A total of 179,810 survivors of hospitalization with AMI without HF or LVSD, between January 1, 2007, and June 30, 2013 (final follow-up: December 31, 2013), were assessed. Survival-time inverse probability weighting propensity scores and instrumental variable analyses were used to investigate the association between the use of beta-blockers and 1-year mortality.</p><p>RESULTS: Of 91,895 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 87,915 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 88,542 (96.4%) and 81,933 (93.2%) received beta-blockers, respectively. For the entire cohort, with&gt; 163,772 person-years of observation, there were 9,373 deaths (5.2%). Unadjusted 1-year mortality was lower for patients who received beta-blockers compared with those who did not (4.9% vs. 11.2%; p &lt; 0.001). However, after weighting and adjustment, there was no significant difference in mortality between those with and without beta-blocker use (average treatment effect [ATE] coefficient: 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.60 to 0.75; p = 0.827). Findings were similar for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: 0.30; 95% CI: -0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coefficient: -0.07; 95% CI: -0.68 to 0.54; p = 0.819).</p><p>CONCLUSIONS: Among survivors of hospitalization with AMI who did not have HF or LVSD as recorded in the hospital, the use of beta-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of death at any time point up to 1 year.</p>
3.
  • Pasea, Laura, et al. (författare)
  • Personalising the decision for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy development, validation and potential impact of prognosticmodels for cardiovascular events and bleeding in myocardial infarction survivors
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 38:14, s. 1048-1055A
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • <p>Aims The aim of this study is to develop models to aid the decision to prolong dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) that requires balancing an individual patient's potential benefits and harms Methods and results Using population-based electronic health records (EHRs) (CALIBER, England, 2000-10), of patients evaluated 1 year after acute myocardial infarction (MI), we developed (n= 12 694 patients) and validated (n= 5613) prognostic models for cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, MI or stroke) events and three different bleeding endpoints. We applied trial effect estimates to determine potential benefits and harms of DAPT and the net clinical benefit of individuals. Prognostic models for cardiovascular events (c-index: 0.75 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.77)) and bleeding (c index 0.72 (95% CI: 0.67, 0.77)) were well calibrated: 3-year risk of cardiovascular events was 16.5% overall (5.2% in the lowest-and 46.7% in the highest-risk individuals), while for major bleeding, it was 1.7% (0.3% in the lowest-and 5.4% in the highest-risk patients). For every 10 000 patients treated per year, we estimated 249 (95% CI: 228, 269) cardiovascular events prevented and 134 (95% CI: 87, 181) major bleeding events caused in the highest-risk patients, and 28 (95% CI: 19, 37) cardiovascular events prevented and 9 (95% CI: 0, 20) major bleeding events caused in the lowest-risk patients. There was a net clinical benefit of prolonged DAPT in 63-99% patients depending on how benefits and harms were weighted Conclusion Prognostic models for cardiovascular events and bleeding using population-based EHRs may help to personalise decisions for prolonged DAPT 1-year following acute MI.</p>
4.
  • Rapsomaniki, Eleni, et al. (författare)
  • Using big data from health records from four countries to evaluate chronic disease outcomes a study in 114 364 survivors of myocardial infarction
  • 2016
  • Ingår i: European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes. - Oxford University Press. - 2058-5225 .- 2058-1742. ; 2:3, s. 172-183
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • <p><strong>Aims</strong> To assess the international validity of using hospital record data to compare long-term outcomes in heart attack survivors.</p><p><strong>Methods and results</strong> We used samples of national, ongoing, unselected record sources to assess three outcomes: cause death; a composite of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and all-cause death; and hospitalized bleeding. Patients aged 65 years and older entered the study 1 year following the most recent discharge for acute MI in 2002–11 [<em>n</em> = 54 841 (Sweden), 53 909 (USA), 4653 (England), and 961 (France)]. Across each of the four countries, we found consistent associations with 12 baseline prognostic factors and each of the three outcomes. In each country, we observed high 3-year crude cumulative risks of all-cause death (from 19.6% [England] to 30.2% [USA]); the composite of MI, stroke, or death [from 26.0% (France) to 36.2% (USA)]; and hospitalized bleeding [from 3.1% (France) to 5.3% (USA)]. After adjustments for baseline risk factors, risks were similar across all countries [relative risks (RRs) compared with Sweden not statistically significant], but higher in the USA for all-cause death [RR USA vs. Sweden, 1.14 (95% confidence interval 1.04–1.26)] and hospitalized bleeding [RR USA vs. Sweden, 1.54 (1.21–1.96)].</p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong> The validity of using hospital record data is supported by the consistency of estimates across four countries of a high adjusted risk of death, further MI, and stroke in the chronic phase after MI. The possibility that adjusted risks of mortality and bleeding are higher in the USA warrants further study.</p>
5.
  • Schiele, Francois, et al. (författare)
  • Quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction : A position paper of the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association.
  • 2017
  • Ingår i: European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care. - Sage Publications. - 2048-8734. ; 6:1, s. 34-59
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • <p>Evaluation of quality of care is an integral part of modern healthcare, and has become an indispensable tool for health authorities, the public, the press and patients. However, measuring quality of care is difficult, because it is a multifactorial and multidimensional concept that cannot be estimated solely on the basis of patients' clinical outcomes. Thus, measuring the process of care through quality indicators (QIs) has become a widely used practice in this context. Other professional societies have published QIs for the evaluation of quality of care in the context of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but no such indicators exist in Europe. In this context, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) has reflected on the measurement of quality of care in the context of AMI (ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)) and created a set of QIs, with a view to developing programmes to improve quality of care for the management of AMI across Europe. We present here the list of QIs defined by the ACCA, with explanations of the methodology used, scientific justification and reasons for the choice for each measure.</p>
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-5 av 5
 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy