Trends in Acute Myocardial Infarction in 4 Us States Clinical Characteristics, Quality of Care, and Outcomes

Background— Because of the health impact of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), substantial resources have been dedicated to improving AMI care and outcomes. Long-term trends in the clinical characteristics, quality of care, and outcomes for AMI over time from the health system perspective in geographically diverse populations are not well known. Methods and Results— The present study included 20 550 Medicare patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized in 4 US states (Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, Wisconsin) with the confirmed primary discharge diagnosis of AMI in 4 periods: 1992–1993 (n=10 292), 1995 (n=5566), 1998–1999 (n=2413), and 2000–2001 (n=2279). With the use of standard quality indicator definitions, treatment of ideal candidates with aspirin and &bgr;-blockers within 24 hours after presentation, &bgr;-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge was assessed. Multivariable models were constructed to calculate adjusted 1-year mortality. The hospitalized Medicare population with AMI changed substantially during 1992–2001, with increasing age, more comorbidity, and fewer meeting ideal treatment criteria. Although treatment rates increased significantly for all medications, aspirin, &bgr;-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were not provided at discharge to 12.6%, 19.7%, and 25.2% of ideal candidates, respectively, in 2000–2001. Crude 1-year mortality increased (27.6%, 28.3%, 30.6%, and 31.0%; P=0.003 for trend, but adjusted mortality declined (compared with 1992–1993, relative risk in 1995=0.94 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.01]; relative risk in 1998–1999=0.91 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.98]; relative risk in 2000–2001=0.87 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.94]). Conclusions— The quality of care and adjusted 1-year mortality improved significantly for Medicare beneficiaries with AMI during 1992–2001. Nevertheless, fewer were ideal for guideline-based therapy, and absolute mortality remains high, suggesting the need for treatment strategies applicable to a broader range of older patients.

[1]  Jerod M Loeb,et al.  Quality of Care in U . S . Hospitals as Reflected by Standardized Measures , 2002 – 2004 , 2005 .

[2]  V. Salomaa,et al.  A new definition for myocardial infarction: what difference does it make? , 2005, European heart journal.

[3]  A. Jha,et al.  Care in U.S. hospitals--the Hospital Quality Alliance program. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  A. Folsom,et al.  Trends in the sensitivity, positive predictive value, false-positive rate, and comparability ratio of hospital discharge diagnosis codes for acute myocardial infarction in four US communities, 1987-2000. , 2004, American journal of epidemiology.

[5]  J. Alpert,et al.  A 25-year perspective into the changing landscape of patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (the Worcester Heart Attack Study). , 2004, The American journal of cardiology.

[6]  W. Gibler,et al.  Care of non-ST-segment elevation patients: insights from the CRUSADE national quality improvement initiative. , 2004, American heart journal.

[7]  J. Killian,et al.  Evidence-based therapies for myocardial infarction: secular trends and determinants of practice in the community. , 2004, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[8]  J. Gore,et al.  Communitywide trends in the use and outcomes associated with beta-blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction: the Worcester Heart Attack Study. , 2003, Archives of internal medicine.

[9]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  National and state trends in quality of care for acute myocardial infarction between 1994-1995 and 1998-1999: the medicare health care quality improvement program. , 2003, Archives of internal medicine.

[10]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Most hospitalized older persons do not meet the enrollment criteria for clinical trials in heart failure. , 2003, American heart journal.

[11]  Xiaonan Xue,et al.  Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. , 2003, American journal of epidemiology.

[12]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Quality of Care of Medicare Beneficiaries with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Who Is Included in Quality Improvement Measurement? , 2003, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[13]  S. Jencks,et al.  Change in the quality of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries, 1998-1999 to 2000-2001. , 2003, JAMA.

[14]  H. Tunstall-Pedoe,et al.  Definitions for Acute Coronary Heart Disease in Epidemiology and Clinical Research Studies , 2003 .

[15]  J. Killian,et al.  Longitudinal trends in the severity of acute myocardial infarction: a population study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. , 2002, American journal of epidemiology.

[16]  J. Gore,et al.  Twenty-two year (1975 to 1997) trends in the incidence, in-hospital and long-term case fatality rates from initial Q-wave and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: a multi-hospital, community-wide perspective. , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  W. Rogers,et al.  Temporal trends in the treatment of over 1.5 million patients with myocardial infarction in the US from 1990 through 1999: the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 1, 2 and 3. , 2000, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  B. B. Fleming,et al.  Quality of medical care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: A profile at state and national levels. , 2000, JAMA.

[19]  L. Pilotto [Estimation of contribution of changes in coronary care to improving survival, event rates, and coronary heart disease mortality across the WHO MONICA Project populations]. , 2000, Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology.

[20]  A. Folsom,et al.  Trends in severity of hospitalized myocardial infarction: the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study, 1987-1994. , 2000, American heart journal.

[21]  A. Folsom,et al.  Trends in the incidence of myocardial infarction and in mortality due to coronary heart disease, 1987 to 1994. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Improving the quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: results from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. , 1998, JAMA.

[23]  E. Huff,et al.  Comprehensive reliability assessment and comparison of quality indicators and their components. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  H. Wolf,et al.  Decreasing mortality from acute myocardial infarctions: effect of attack rates and case severity. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[25]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction. A four-state pilot study from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. , 1995, JAMA.

[26]  B. McNeil,et al.  Temporal changes in the care and outcomes of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction, 1987 through 1990. , 1993, JAMA.

[27]  S. Jencks,et al.  The health care quality improvement initiative. A new approach to quality assurance in Medicare. , 1992, JAMA.

[28]  E. Fisher,et al.  Studying Outcomes and Hospital Utilization in the Elderly: The Advantages of a Merged Data Base for Medicare and Veterans Affairs Hospitals , 1992, Medical care.

[29]  G. Burke,et al.  Secular trends in Q wave and non-Q wave acute myocardial infarction. The Minnesota Heart Survey. , 1991, Circulation.