Dataset Information

Did inter-hospital transfer reduce mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction in the real world? A nationwide patient cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are preferred over onsite thrombolysis when provided expeditiously. On the other hand, its benefit has not been evaluated in a real-world situation. This study examined the effects of IHT on the short- and long-term mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and compared the reperfusion treatments and resources between the referring and receiving hospitals.

Methods

Patients newly diagnosed with AMI and admitted to hospital were selected from the national health insurance database from 2004 to 2018. The 30-day and one-year mortality in the transferred and non-transferred patients were estimated and compared using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for confounding bias.

Results

Of the 258,291 participants, 10,158 were transferred to one or more hospitals. IHT was more likely to occur to older or more comorbid people, patients in rural areas, and those whose insurance was medical aid. The 30-day and one-year mortality of the non-IHT group was 9.7% and 15.8%, respectively, whereas the figure was 11.4% and 20.5% in the IHT group. After balancing the baseline characteristics, the transferred patients were 1.12 (95% CI: 1.06-1.20) and 1.25 (95% CI: 1.20-1.31) times more likely to die during the subsequent 30 days and one year, respectively, than those treated solely at the presenting hospital. In ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the hazard ratios of the 30-day and 1-year mortality were 1.14 (95% CI: 0.97-1.35) and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.15-1.49) in the transferred patients after balancing cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest. On-site thrombolysis was rarely performed in the referring hospitals.

Conclusion

Patients transferred for the treatment of AMI experienced higher short- and long-term mortality. Therefore, onsite thrombolysis and the estimated time delay to PCI should be considered in regional hospitals to reduce mortality with the organization of STEMI treatment networks.

SUBMITTER: Kim MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8341481 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Despite recent improvements in survival after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), U.S. hospitals vary 2-fold in their 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs). Nevertheless, information is limited on hospital-level factors that may be associated with RSMRs.To identify hospital strategies that were associated with lower RSMRs.Cross-sectional survey of 537 hospitals (91% response rate) and weighted multivariate regression by using data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to determine the associations between hospital strategies and hospital RSMRs.Acute care hospitals with an annualized AMI volume of at least 25 patients.Patients hospitalized with AMI between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2009.Hospital performance improvement strategies, characteristics, and 30-day RSMRs.In multivariate analysis, several hospital strategies were significantly associated with lower RSMRs and in aggregate were associated with clinically important differences in RSMRs. These strategies included holding monthly meetings to review AMI cases between hospital clinicians and staff who transported patients to the hospital (RSMR lower by 0.70 percentage points), having cardiologists always on site (lower by 0.54 percentage points), fostering an organizational environment in which clinicians are encouraged to solve problems creatively (lower by 0.84 percentage points), not cross-training nurses from intensive care units for the cardiac catheterization laboratory (lower by 0.44 percentage points), and having physician and nurse champions rather than nurse champions alone (lower by 0.88 percentage points). Fewer than 10% of hospitals reported using at least 4 of these 5 strategies.The cross-sectional design demonstrates statistical associations but cannot establish causal relationships.Several strategies, which are currently implemented by relatively few hospitals, are associated with significantly lower 30-day RSMRs for patients with AMI.The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the United Health Foundation, and the Commonwealth Fund.

Project description:Language barriers between patients and providers may influence the process and quality of care.To examine the association of language preference with length of stay (LOS) and in-hospital mortality for patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI).Electronic administrative hospital discharge data for all non-disabled Medicaid beneficiaries age 35 years and older admitted to all acute care California hospitals with a diagnosis of AMI between 1994 and 1998.We used multivariate regression to explore whether observed differences in the hospital LOS and in-hospital mortality between non-English preference (NEP) and English preference (EP) individuals could be explained by individual and/or hospital level factors. We adjusted for patient level characteristics using 24 covariates from a previously validated prediction model of mortality after hospitalization for AMI.Of 12,609 Medicaid patients across 401 California hospitals, 2,757 (22%) had NEP. NEP was associated with a 3.9% increased LOS (95% CI 0.7, 7.1; p = 0.02) in unadjusted analysis and a 3.8% increased LOS (95% CI 0.3, 7.3; p = 0.03) after controlling for patient level characteristics. Differences in LOS were no longer significant after adjusting receipt of cardiac procedure/ surgery (2.8%; 95% CI -0.6, 6.2; p = 0.1) or after adjusting for hospital (0.9%; 95% CI -2.5, 4.3; p = 0.6). Non-English language preference was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in unadjusted analysis (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% CI 0.69, 0.94; p = 0.005), but was not significant after adjusting for patient level characteristics (adjusted OR [AOR] 0.95; 95% CI 0.78, 1.27; p = 0.6). Adjusting for receipt of cardiac procedure/ surgery (AOR 0.97; 95% CI 0.79, 1.18; p = 0.7) and hospital (AOR 0.97; 95% CI 0.78; 1.21; p = 0.8) did not alter this finding.Language preference is not associated with AMI mortality, and the small increase in length of stay associated with non-English preference is accounted for by hospital level factors. Our results suggest that system level differences are important to consider in studies of the effect of language barriers in the health care setting.