| 1. |
- Alabas, Oras A., et al.
(författare)
-
Sex Differences in Treatments, Relative Survival, and Excess Mortality Following Acute Myocardial Infarction : National Cohort Study Using the SWEDEHEART Registry
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : WILEY. - 2047-9980 .- 2047-9980. ; 6:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background - This study assessed sex differences in treatments, all-cause mortality, relative survival, and excess mortality following acute myocardial infarction.Methods and Results - A population-based cohort of all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART [Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies]) from 2003 to 2013 was included in the analysis. Excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs), adjusted for clinical characteristics and guideline-indicated treatments after matching by age, sex, and year to background mortality data, were estimated. Although there were no sex differences in all-cause mortality adjusted for age, year of hospitalization, and comorbidities for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI at 1 year (mortality rate ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-1.05] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-.99], respectively) and 5 years (mortality rate ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99-1.07] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-.99], respectively), excess mortality was higher among women compared with men for STEMI and non-STEMI at 1 year (EMRR: 1.89 [95% CI, 1.66-2.16] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.16-1.24], respectively) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.48-1.72] and 1.26 [95% CI, 1.21-1.32], respectively). After further adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments, excess mortality among women with non-STEMI was not significant at 1 year (EMRR: 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97-1.04]) and slightly higher at 5 years (EMRR: 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.12]). For STEMI, adjustment for treatments attenuated the excess mortality for women at 1 year (EMRR: 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26-1.62]) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.31 [95% CI, 1.19-1.43]).Conclusions - Women with acute myocardial infarction did not have statistically different all-cause mortality, but had higher excess mortality compared with men that was attenuated after adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments. This suggests that improved adherence to guideline recommendations for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction may reduce premature cardiovascular death among women.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- 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
- BACKGROUND: For acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without heart failure (HF), it is unclear if beta-blockers are associated with reduced mortality.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).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.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> 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 < 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).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.
|
|
| 4. |
- Faxén, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
A user-friendly risk-score for predicting in-hospital cardiac arrest among patients admitted with suspected non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome - The SAFER-score
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 121, s. 41-48
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIM: To develop a simple risk-score model for predicting in-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) among patients hospitalized with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).METHODS: Using the Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART), we identified patients (n=242 303) admitted with suspected NSTE-ACS between 2008 and 2014. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between 26 candidate variables and in-hospital CA. A risk-score model was developed and validated using a temporal cohort (n=126 073) comprising patients from SWEDEHEART between 2005 and 2007 and an external cohort (n=276 109) comprising patients from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) between 2008 and 2013.RESULTS: The incidence of in-hospital CA for NSTE-ACS and non-ACS was lower in the SWEDEHEART-derivation cohort than in MINAP (1.3% and 0.5% vs. 2.3% and 2.3%). A seven point, five variable risk score (age ≥60 years (1 point), ST-T abnormalities (2 points), Killip Class >1 (1 point), heart rate <50 or ≥100bpm (1 point), and systolic blood pressure <100mmHg (2 points) was developed. Model discrimination was good in the derivation cohort (c-statistic 0.72) and temporal validation cohort (c-statistic 0.74), and calibration was reasonable with a tendency towards overestimation of risk with a higher sum of score points. External validation showed moderate discrimination (c-statistic 0.65) and calibration showed a general underestimation of predicted risk.CONCLUSIONS: A simple points score containing five variables readily available on admission predicts in-hospital CA for patients with suspected NSTE-ACS.
|
|
| 5. |
- Juszczak, Edmund, et al.
(författare)
-
Introducing the CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using cohorts and routinely collected health data
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Trials. - : BMC. - 1745-6215. ; 20:Suppl. 1, s. 131-131
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly being conducted using existing sources of data, such as cohorts, administrative databases, disease registries and electronic health records. RCTs conducted using existing data sources require additional information to be reported. This reporting guideline is an extension of the 2010 version of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data.Methods: A long-list of potential items for the checklist was identified through two methods: firstly, modifications to the current CONSORT checklist were generated using existing reporting guidelines, including the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) and REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statements. Secondly, ascoping review of RCTs conducted in the last decade using cohorts and routinely collected health data facilitated the modification and identification of other potential items. Using the long-list, a three-stage Delphi exercise was conducted to assess the importance of each item for inclusion in the final extension checklist, which was finalised at a face-to-face meeting of experts.Results: A long-list of 27 items was created and 125 experts registered for the three-round Delphi exercise (92, 77 and 62 experts participated in each round respectively). Consensus was reached on 21 out of 27 items. The results of the Delphi exercise informed a face-to-face consensus meeting in May 2019; core items to be included in the extension checklist were finalised at this meeting. Corresponding explanations of extensions and new items with examples of good reporting were developed subsequently.Conclusion: The guideline checklist can facilitate transparent reporting of RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data, to assist evaluations of rigour and reproducibility, enhance understanding of the methodology, and make the results more useful for clinicians, journal editors, reviewers, guideline authors, and funders.
|
|
| 6. |
- Kwakkenbos, Linda, et al.
(författare)
-
Protocol for a scoping review to support development of a CONSORT extension for randomised controlled trials using cohorts and routinely collected health data
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 8:8
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted using cohorts and routinely collected health data, including registries, electronic health records and administrative databases, are increasingly used in healthcare intervention research. The development of an extension of the CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement for RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data is being undertaken with the goal of improving reporting quality by setting standards early in the process of uptake of these designs. To develop this extension to the CONSORT statement, a scoping review will be conducted to identify potential modifications or clarifications of existing reporting guideline items, as well as additional items needed for reporting RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data.Methods and analysis: In separate searches, we will seek publications on methods or reporting or that describe protocols or results from RCTs using cohorts, registries, electronic health records and administrative databases. Data sources will include Medline and the Cochrane Methodology Register. For each of the four main types of RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data, separately, two investigators will independently review included publications to extract potential checklist items. A potential item will either modify an existing CONSORT 2010, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology or REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely collected health Data item or will be proposed as a new item. Additionally, we will identify examples of good reporting in RCTs using cohorts and routinely collected health data.Ethics and dissemination: The proposed scoping review will help guide the development of the CONSORT extension statement for RCTs conducted using cohorts and routinely collected health data.
|
|
| 7. |
- 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. - : Sage Publications. - 2048-8726 .- 2048-8734. ; 6:1, s. 34-59
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 8. |
- Simonsson, Moa, et al.
(författare)
-
Development and Validation of a Novel Risk Score for In-Hospital Major Bleeding in Acute Myocardial Infarction : The SWEDEHEART Score
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : WILEY. - 2047-9980 .- 2047-9980. ; 8:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background – Bleeding risk stratification in acute coronary syndrome is of highest clinical interest but current risk scores have limitations. We sought to develop and validate a new in-hospital bleeding risk score for patients with acute myocardial infarction.Methods and Results – From the nationwide SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies) register, 97,597 patients with acute myocardial infarction enrolled from 2009 until 2014 were selected. A full model with 23 predictor variables and 8 interaction terms was fitted using logistic regression. The full model was approximated by a model with 5 predictors and 1 interaction term. Calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility was evaluated and compared with the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) and CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) scores. Internal and temporal validity was assessed. In-hospital major bleeding, defined as fatal, intracranial, or requiring surgery or blood transfusion, occurred in 1356 patients (1.4%). The 5 predictors in the approximate model that constituted the SWEDEHEART score were hemoglobin, age, sex, creatinine, and Creactive protein. The ACTION and CRUSADE scores were poorly calibrated in the derivation cohort and therefore were recalibrated. The SWEDEHEART score showed higher discriminative ability than both recalibrated scores, overall (C-index 0.80 versus 0.73/0.72) and in all predefined subgroups. Decision curve analysis demonstrated consistently positive and higher net benefit for the SWEDEHEART score compared with both recalibrated scores across all clinically relevant decision thresholds. The original ACTION and CRUSADE scores showed negative net benefit.Conclusions – The 5-item SWEDEHEART score discriminates in-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute myocardial infarction and has superior model performance compared with the recalibrated ACTION and CRUSADE scores.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Yndigegn, Troels, et al.
(författare)
-
Registry-based randomised clinical trial : Efficient evaluation of generic pharmacotherapies in the contemporary era
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 104:19, s. 1562-1567
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Randomised clinical trials are the gold standard for testing the effectiveness of clinical interventions. However, increasing complexity and associated costs may limit their application in the investigation of key cardiovascular knowledge gaps such as the re-evaluation of generic pharmacotherapies. The registry-based randomised clinical trial (RRCT) leverages data sampling from nationwide quality registries to facilitate high participant inclusion rates at comparably low costs and, therefore, may offer a mechanism by which such clinical questions may be answered. To date, a number of studies have been conducted using such trial designs, but uncritical use of the RRCT design may lead to erroneous conclusions. The current review provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the RRCT, as well as provides an exploratory example of how a trial may be designed to test the long-term effectiveness of beta blockers in patients with myocardial infarction who have preserved left ventricular systolic function.
|
|
