Temporal trends of system of care for STEMI: insights from the Jakarta Cardiovascular Care Unit Network System

Surya Dharma, Bambang Budi Siswanto, Isman Firdaus, Iwan Dakota, Hananto Andriantoro, Alexander J Wardeh, Arnoud van der Laarse, J Wouter Jukema, Surya Dharma, Bambang Budi Siswanto, Isman Firdaus, Iwan Dakota, Hananto Andriantoro, Alexander J Wardeh, Arnoud van der Laarse, J Wouter Jukema

Abstract

Aim: Guideline implementation programs are of paramount importance in optimizing acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care. Assessment of performance indicators from a local STEMI network will provide knowledge of how to improve the system of care.

Methods and results: Between 2008-2011, 1505 STEMI patients were enrolled. We compared the performance indicators before (n = 869) and after implementation (n = 636) of a local STEMI network. In 2011 (after introduction of STEMI networking) compared to 2008-2010, there were more inter-hospital referrals for STEMI patients (61% vs 56%, p<0.001), more primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures (83% vs 73%, p = 0.005), and more patients reaching door-to-needle time ≤ 30 minutes (84.5% vs 80.2%, p<0.001). However, numbers of patients who presented very late (>12 hours after symptom onset) were similar (53% vs 51%, NS). Moreover, the numbers of patients with door-to-balloon time ≤ 90 minutes were similar (49.1% vs 51.3%, NS), and in-hospital mortality rates were similar (8.3% vs 6.9%, NS) in 2011 compared to 2008-2010.

Conclusion: After a local network implementation for patients with STEMI, there were significantly more inter-hospital referral cases, primary PCI procedures, and patients with a door-to-needle time ≤ 30 minutes, compared to the period before implementation of this network. However, numbers of patients who presented very late, the targeted door-to-balloon time and in-hospital mortality rate were similar in both periods. To improve STEMI networking based on recent guidelines, existing pre-hospital and in-hospital protocols should be improved and managed more carefully, and should be accommodated whenever possible.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Patient distribution in the Jakarta…
Figure 1. Patient distribution in the Jakarta Acute Coronary Syndrome registry.
ACS = acute coronary syndrome, STEMI = ST-elevation myocardial infarction, PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention, TIMI = Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction.

References

    1. Steg Ph G, James SK (2012) On behalf of the Task Force for The 2012 European Society of Cardiology Guideline on management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST segment elevation. Eur Heart J 33: 2569–2619.
    1. Dharma S, Juzar DA, Firdaus I, Soerianata S, Wardeh AJ, et al. (2012) Acute myocardial infarction system of care in the third world. Neth Heart J 20: 254–259.
    1. Danchin N (2009) System of care for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Impact of different models on clinical outcomes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2: 901–908.
    1. Liem SS, van der Hoeven BL, Oemrawsingh PV, Bax JJ, van der Bom JG, et al. (2007) MISSION!: Optimization of acute and chronic care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 153: e1–e11.
    1. Eagle KA, Montoye CK, Riba AL, DeFranco AC, Parrish R, et al. (2005) Guideline-based standardized care is associated with substantially lower mortality in Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Projects in Michigan. J Am Coll Cardiol 46: 1242–1248.
    1. Cannon CP, Gibson M, Lambrew CT, Shoultz DA, Levy D, et al. (2000) Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 283: 2941–2947.
    1. Nallamothu BK, Bates ER (2003) Percutaneous coronary intervention versus fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction: is timing (almost) everything? Am J Cardiol 92: 824–826.
    1. De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, Antman EM (2004) Time delay to treatment and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 109: 1223–1225.
    1. Rokos IC, French WJ, Koenig WJ, Stratton SJ, Nighswonger B, et al. (2009) Integration of prehospital electrocardiograms and ST-elevation myocardial infarction receiving center (SRC) networks: impact on door to balloon times across 10 independent regions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2: 339–343.
    1. Kudenchuk PJ, Maynard C, Cobb LA, Wirkus M, Martin JS, et al. (1998) Utility of the prehospital electrocardiogram in diagnosing acute coronary syndromes: the Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention (MITI) Project. J Am Coll Cardiol 32: 17–27.
    1. Diercks DB, Kontos MC, Chen AY, Pollack CV, Wiviott SD, et al. (2009) Utilization and impact of prehospital electrocardiograms for patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: data from the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 53: 161–166.
    1. Labresh KA, Ellrodt AG, Gliklich R, Liljestrand J, Peto (2004) Get with the guidelines for cardiovascular secondary prevention: pilot results. Arch Intern Med 164: 203–209.
    1. Eagle KA, Montoye CK, Riba AL, DeFranco AC, Parrish R, et al. (2005) Guideline based standardized care is associated with substantially lower mortality in Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Projects in Michigan. J Am Coll Cardiol 46: 1242–1248.
    1. Fonarow GC, Gawlinski A, Moughrabi S, Tilisch JH (2001) Improved treatment of coronary heart disease by implementation of a Cardiac Hospitalization Atherosclerosis Management Program (CHAMP). Am J Cardiol 87: 819–822.
    1. Burwen DR, Galusha DH, Lewis JM, Bedinger MR, Radford MJ, et al. (2003) 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. Arch Intern Med 163: 1430–1439.
    1. Hasdai D, Behar S, Wallentin L, Danchin N, Gitt AK, et al. (2002) A prospective survey of the characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes in Europe and the Mediterranian basin; the Euro Heart Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes (Euro Heart Survey ACS). Eur Heart J 23: 1190–1201.
    1. Barron HV, Bowlby LJ, Breen T, Rogers WJ, Canto JG, et al. (1998) Use of reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction in the United States: data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Circulation 97: 1150–1156.
    1. Nallamothu BK, Bates ER, Herrin J, Wang Y, Bradley EH, et al. (2005) Times to treatment in transfer patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI) ¾ analysis. Circulation 111: 761–767.
    1. EUROASPIRE I and II Group (2001) Clinical reality of coronary prevention guidelines: a comparison of EUROASPIRE I and II in nine countries. European Action on Secondary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events. Lancet 357: 995–1001.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться