Quality of acute myocardial infarction care in England and Wales during the COVID-19 pandemic: linked nationwide cohort study

Background and objectiveThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is uncertain. We aimed to compare quality of AMI care in England and Wales during and before the COVID-19 pandemic using the 2020 European Society of Cardiology Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care quality indicators (QIs) for AMI.MethodsCohort study of linked data from the AMI and the percutaneous coronary intervention registries in England and Wales between 1 January 2017 and 27 May 2020 (representing 236 743 patients from 186 hospitals). At the patient level, the likelihood of attainment for each QI compared with pre COVID-19 was calculated using logistic regression. The date of the first national lockdown in England and Wales (23 March 2020) was chosen for time series comparisons.ResultsThere were 10 749 admissions with AMI after 23 March 2020. Compared with before the lockdown, patients admitted with AMI during the first wave had similar age (mean 68.0 vs 69.0 years), with no major differences in baseline characteristics (history of diabetes (25% vs 26%), renal failure (6.4% vs 6.9%), heart failure (5.8% vs 6.4%) and previous myocardial infarction (22.9% vs 23.7%)), and less frequently had high Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk scores (43.6% vs 48.6%). There was an improvement in attainment for 10 (62.5%) of the 16 measured QIs including a composite QI (43.8% to 45.2%, OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10) during, compared with before, the lockdown.ConclusionDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in England and Wales, quality of care for AMI as measured against international standards did not worsen, but improved modestly.

Download Full-text

National and state trends in quality of care for acute myocardial infarction between 1994–1995 and 1998–1999. the medicaid health care quality improvement program

ACC Current Journal Review ◽

10.1016/j.accreview.2003.08.064 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 12 (5) ◽

pp. 21 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

D.R. Burwen ◽

D.H. Galusha ◽

J.M. Lewis

Keyword(s):

Myocardial Infarction ◽

Health Care ◽

Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽

Quality Improvement ◽

Quality Of Care ◽

Health Care Quality ◽

Care Quality ◽

Improvement Program ◽

Health Care Quality Improvement

Download Full-text

The impact of sex, gender and healthcare system on quality of care among young adults with acute myocardial infarction

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.3175 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

V Raparelli ◽

L Pilote ◽

H Behlouli ◽

J Dziura ◽

H Bueno ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Myocardial Infarction ◽

Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽

Young Adults ◽

Quality Of Care ◽

Healthcare System ◽

Quality Indicators ◽

Funding Source ◽

Post Discharge ◽

Single Payer

Abstract Background The quality of care among young adults with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may be related to biological sex, psycho-socio-cultural (gender) determinants or healthcare system-level factors. Purpose To examine whether sex, gender, and the type of healthcare system influence the quality of AMI care among young adults. Methods A total of 4,564 AMI young adults (<55 years) (59% women, 47 years, 66% US) were analyzed from the VIRGO and GENESIS-PRAXY studies consisting of single-payer (Canada, Spain) versus multipayer (US) systems. For each patient treated in each system we calculated a quality of care score (QCS) for pre-AMI (1-year pre admission), in-hospital, and post-AMI (1-year post discharge) phases of care (number of quality indicators received divided by the total number [range=0–100%], with higher scores indicating better quality). Ordinal logistic or linear regression models, and 2-way interactions between sex, gender and healthcare system were tested. Results Women in the multipayer system had the highest risk factor burden. Across the phases of care for AMI, 20% of quality indicators were missed in both sexes. High stress, earner status, and social support were associated with a higher QCS in the pre-AMI phase, whereas only employment and earner status were associated with QCS in all other phases. In the pre-AMI phase, women had higher QCS than men, mainly in the single-payer system (adjusted-OR=1.85, 95% CI 1.46,2.35 vs. 1.07, 95% CI 0.84,1.36, P-interaction= 0.002). Regardless of sex, only employment status had a greater effect in the multipayer system (adjusted-OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.44,0.78 vs 1.13, 95% CI 0.89,1.44, P-interaction <0.001). In the in-hospital phase, women had a lower QCS than men, especially in the multipayer system (adjusted-mean-difference: −2.48, 95% CI-3.87, −1.08). Employment was associated with a higher QCS (2.0, 95% CI 0.9–3.17, P-interaction >0.05). Finally, in the post-AMI phase, men and women had a lower QCS, predominantly in the multipayer system. However, primary earners had higher QCS regardless of system. Conclusion Sex, gender, and healthcare system affected the quality of care after AMI. Women had a poorer in-hospital than men and both women and men had suboptimal post-discharge care. Being unemployed lowered the quality of care, more so in the multipayer system. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): Canadian Institutes of Health and Research (CIHR)

Download Full-text