The Implementation of Guidelines and Prognosis among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Is Influenced by Physicians’ Perception of Antecedent Physical and Cognitive StatusPorter A.a · Iakobishvili Z.a · Dictiar R.b · Behar S.c · Hod H.c · Gottlieb S.c · Hammerman H.d · Zahger D.e · Hasdai D.a
aDepartment of Cardiology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, and Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, bIsraeli Center for Disease Control and cNeufeld Cardiac Research Center, Tel Hashomer, dRambam Medical Center, Haifa, and eSoroka Medical Center, Beer Sheva, Israel
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Background/Aims: Physicians’ perception of antecedent physical/cognitive status may account for the suboptimal implementation of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) guidelines. Methods: In an ACS survey of all cardiac wards, physicians’ perception of antecedent physical/cognitive status was prospectively recorded and categorized as either normal, mildly impaired or significantly impaired. We examined the impact of antecedent status on the use of evidence-based medications and procedures and on mortality. Results: Of the 2,021 patients, 1,025 (51%) had ST elevation. Impaired antecedent physical/cognitive status was diagnosed in 417 patients (20.6%), more commonly among non-ST-elevation patients (26.2 vs. 15.2%). Patients with impaired physical/cognitive status, with or without ST elevation, had significantly worse baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. They less often received aspirin, clopidogrel, platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, statins and β-adrenergic blockers, and significantly less often underwent in-hospital catheterization and revascularization. Reperfusion treatment was given significantly less frequently to ST elevation patients with impaired status (63.0% for normal vs. 50.8% and 33.3% for mildly and significantly impaired status, respectively; p = 0.001). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, impaired antecedent status remained independently associated with lower use of these therapies and higher mortality rates. Conclusions: ACS guideline implementation is significantly influenced by physicians’ perception of antecedent physical/cognitive status, and thus is a crucial parameter for understanding ACS management and outcomes.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.