Comparison of hospital variation in acute myocardial infarction care and outcome between Sweden and United Kingdom: population based cohort study using nationwide clinical registries

Sheng-Chia Chung, Johan Sundström, Chris P Gale, Stefan James, John Deanfield, Lars Wallentin, Adam Timmis, Tomas Jernberg, Harry Hemingway, Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies/Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive care Admissions, National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research/Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project, CAardiovascular Disease Research Using Linked Bespoke Studies and Electronic Health Records, Sheng-Chia Chung, Johan Sundström, Chris P Gale, Stefan James, John Deanfield, Lars Wallentin, Adam Timmis, Tomas Jernberg, Harry Hemingway, Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies/Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive care Admissions, National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research/Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project, CAardiovascular Disease Research Using Linked Bespoke Studies and Electronic Health Records

Abstract

Objective: To assess the between hospital variation in use of guideline recommended treatments and clinical outcomes for acute myocardial infarction in Sweden and the United Kingdom.

Design: Population based longitudinal cohort study using nationwide clinical registries.

Setting and participants: Nationwide registry data comprising all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, n=87; 119,786 patients) and the UK (NICOR/MINAP, n=242; 391,077 patients), 2004-10.

Main outcome measures: Between hospital variation in 30 day mortality of patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction.

Results: Case mix standardised 30 day mortality from acute myocardial infarction was lower in Swedish hospitals (8.4%) than in UK hospitals (9.7%), with less variation between hospitals (interquartile range 2.6% v 3.5%). In both countries, hospital level variation and 30 day mortality were inversely associated with provision of guideline recommended care. Compared with the highest quarter, hospitals in the lowest quarter for use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention had higher volume weighted 30 day mortality for ST elevation myocardial infarction (10.7% v 6.6% in Sweden; 12.7% v 5.8% in the UK). The adjusted odds ratio comparing the highest with the lowest quarters for hospitals' use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention was 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.79) in Sweden and 0.68 (0.60 to 0.76) in the UK. Differences in risk between hospital quarters of treatment for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction and secondary prevention drugs for all discharged acute myocardial infarction patients were smaller than for reperfusion treatment in both countries.

Conclusion: Between hospital variation in 30 day mortality for acute myocardial infarction was greater in the UK than in Sweden. This was associated with, and may be partly accounted for by, the higher practice variation in acute myocardial infarction guideline recommended treatment in the UK hospitals. High quality healthcare across all hospitals, especially in the UK, with better use of guideline recommended treatment, may not only reduce unacceptable practice variation but also deliver improved clinical outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Clinical trials registration Clinical trials NCT01359033.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work other than those acknowledged above; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

© Chung et al 2015.

Figures

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4784767/bin/chus024391.f1_default.jpg
Fig 1 Hospital variation in use (median percentage and interquartile range) of treatment for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non- ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) by year in Sweden and UK. Reperfusion percentage among STEMI patients was weighted by number of STEMI admissions to hospital. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) rate was among hospitals that did ≥5 primary PCIs during year. Percentages of revascularisation and anticoagulant were weighted by NSTEMI admissions. Anticoagulant included heparin
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4784767/bin/chus024391.f2_default.jpg
Fig 2 Hospital variation in use (median percentage and interquartile range) of discharge drugs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) by year in Sweden and UK. Restricted to patients who survived beyond discharge and weighted by hospital AMI volume. ACEI=angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB=angiotensin receptor blocker
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4784767/bin/chus024391.f3_default.jpg
Fig 3 Variation in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) 30 day mortality (median percentage and interquartile range) by year in Swedish and UK hospitals. Weighted by hospital volume of AMI, STEMI, and NSTEMI, respectively
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4784767/bin/chus024391.f4_default.jpg
Fig 4 Hospital variation in case mix standardised 30 day mortality (%) in Sweden and UK, 2004-10
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/4784767/bin/chus024391.f5_default.jpg
Fig 5 Estimated case mix adjusted 30 day mortality for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients and odds ratio by hospital treatment quarters, in Sweden and UK. STEMI mortality reported by hospital reperfusion treatment quarters; NSTEMI mortality reported by hospital revascularisation and anticoagulant use quarters; AMI mortality reported by hospital discharge drug use quarters. ACEI=angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB=angiotensin receptor blocker

References

    1. Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Variation in hospital mortality associated with inpatient surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1368-75.
    1. Tsai TC, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, et al. Variation in surgical-readmission rates and quality of hospital care. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1134-42.
    1. Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Chen J, et al. Reduction in acute myocardial infarction mortality in the United States: risk-standardized mortality rates from 1995-2006. JAMA 2009;302:767-73.
    1. Bradley EH, Herrin J, Elbel B, et al. Hospital quality for acute myocardial infarction: correlation among process measures and relationship with short-term mortality. JAMA 2006;296:72-8.
    1. Peterson ED, Roe MT, Mulgund J, et al. Association between hospital process performance and outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2006;295:1912-20.
    1. Murphy NF, MacIntyre K, Stewart S, et al. Reduced between-hospital variation in short term survival after acute myocardial infarction: the result of improved cardiac care? Heart 2005;91:726-30.
    1. Gale CP, Roberts AP, Batin PD, et al. Funnel plots, performance variation and the Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project 2003-2004. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2006;6:34.
    1. Appleby J, Raleigh V, Frosini F, Bevan G, Gao H, Lyscom T. Variations in health care: the good, the bad and the inexplicable. King’s Fund, 2011.
    1. Jernberg T, Johanson P, Held C, et al. Association between adoption of evidence-based treatment and survival for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA 2011;305:1677-84.
    1. Bradley EH, Herrin J, Curry L, et al. Variation in hospital mortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2010;106:1108-12.
    1. Gale CP, Cattle BA, Woolston A, et al. Resolving inequalities in care? Reduced mortality in the elderly after acute coronary syndromes. The Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project 2003-2010. Eur Heart J 2012;33:630-9.
    1. Jernberg T, Attebring MF, Hambraeus K, et al. The Swedish web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies (SWEDEHEART). Heart 2010;96:1617-21.
    1. Herrett E, Smeeth L, Walker L, et al. The Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP). Heart 2010;96:1264-7.
    1. Chung S-C, Gedeborg R, Nicholas O, et al. Acute myocardial infarction: a comparison of short-term survival in national outcome registries in Sweden and the UK. Lancet 2014;383:1305-12.
    1. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD, et al. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2007;28:2525-38.
    1. Task Force on the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction, Van de Werf F, Bax J, et al. ESC guidelines on management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevation. Rev Esp Cardiol 2009;62:293, e1-47
    1. Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr, et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update) a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:2205-41.
    1. Hamm CW, Bassand JP, Agewall S, et al. ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: the Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2011;32:2999-3054.
    1. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA focused update incorporated into the ACCF/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:e179-347.
    1. Brown H, Prescott R. Applied mixed models in medicine. John Wiley, 2006.
    1. Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP). Tenth public report. 2011. .
    1. Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease. SWEDEHEART 2011 Annual report. .
    1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD StatExtracts. .
    1. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Health for all database (HFA-DB). .
    1. McLenachan JM, Machin S, Marley C. National roll-out of primary PCI for patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: an interim report. NHS Improvement, 2010.
    1. West RM, Cattle BA, Bouyssie M, et al. Impact of hospital proportion and volume on primary percutaneous coronary intervention performance in England and Wales. Eur Heart J 2011;32:706-11.
    1. Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Understanding and reducing variation in surgical mortality. Annu Rev Med 2009;60:405-15.
    1. Ross JS, Normand SL, Wang Y, et al. Hospital volume and 30-day mortality for three common medical conditions. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1110-8.
    1. Bradley EH, Curry LA, Spatz ES, et al. Hospital strategies for reducing risk-standardized mortality rates in acute myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:618-26.
    1. Popescu I, Werner RM, Vaughan-Sarrazin MS, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of America’s lowest-performing hospitals: an analysis of acute myocardial infarction hospital care in the United States. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009;2:221-7.
    1. Limb M. Unexplained variation in hospital admissions must be tackled, report says. BMJ 2011;342:d2380.
    1. Laut KG, Gale CP, Pedersen AB, et al. Persistent geographical disparities in the use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in 120 European regions: exploring the variation. EuroIntervention 2013;9:469-76.
    1. Curry LA, Spatz E, Cherlin E, et al. What distinguishes top-performing hospitals in acute myocardial infarction mortality rates? A qualitative study. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:384-90.
    1. Boyle R. Coronary heart disease ten years on—improving heart care. Department of Health, 2007 (available at ).
    1. Packer C, Simpson S, Stevens A, et al. International diffusion of new health technologies: a ten-country analysis of six health technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006;22:419-28.
    1. Widimsky P, Wijns W, Fajadet J, et al. Reperfusion therapy for ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in Europe: description of the current situation in 30 countries. Eur Heart J 2010;31:943-57.
    1. Carlsson P. Health technology assessment and priority setting for health policy in Sweden. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004;20:44-54.
    1. Herrett E, Shah AD, Boggon R, et al. Completeness and diagnostic validity of recording acute myocardial infarction events in primary care, hospital care, disease registry, and national mortality records: cohort study. BMJ 2013;346:f2350.
    1. Hemingway H, Croft P, Perel P, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 1: a framework for researching clinical outcomes. BMJ 2013;346:e5595.
    1. Peterson ED, Roe MT, Rumsfeld JS, et al. A call to ACTION (acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network): a national effort to promote timely clinical feedback and support continuous quality improvement for acute myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009;2:491-9.
    1. Li J, Li X, Wang Q, et al. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in China from 2001 to 2011 (the China PEACE-Retrospective Acute Myocardial Infarction Study): a retrospective analysis of hospital data. Lancet 2015;385:441-51.
    1. Bannink L, Wells S, Broad J, et al. Web-based assessment of cardiovascular disease risk in routine primary care practice in New Zealand: the first 18,000 patients (PREDICT CVD-1). N Z Med J 2006;119:U2313.
    1. Denaxas SC, George J, Herrett E, et al. Data resource profile: cardiovascular disease research using linked bespoke studies and electronic health records (CALIBER). Int J Epidemiol 2012;41:1625-38.
    1. Herrett E, Bhaskaran K, Timmis A, et al. Association between clinical presentations before myocardial infarction and coronary mortality: a prospective population-based study using linked electronic records. Eur Heart J 2014;35:2363-71.
    1. McNamara RL, Chung SC, Jernberg T, et al. International comparisons of the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and the United States: The MINAP/NICOR, SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, and ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR registries. Int J Cardiol 2014;175:240-7.
    1. Boggon R, van Staa TP, Timmis A, et al. Clopidogrel discontinuation after acute coronary syndromes: frequency, predictors and associations with death and myocardial infarction—a hospital registry-primary care linked cohort (MINAP-GPRD). Eur Heart J 2011;32:2376-86.
    1. Rapsomaniki E, Thuresson M, Yang E, et al. International comparison of outcomes among 140,880 patients stable after acute MI: real world evidence from electronic health and administrative records. European Society of Cardiology Congress, Barcelona, 2014 (available at ).

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する