{"title":"急性冠脉综合征死亡率:居住地重要吗?","authors":"Seyed Hesameddin Abbasi, Örjan Sundin, Arash Jalali, Joaquim Soares, Gloria Macassa","doi":"10.18502/jthc.v17i2.9838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> <b>:</b> Current evidence shows inequality in the outcomes of rural and urban patients treated at their place of residence. This study compared in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to find whether there were differences in the outcome and received treatment. <b>Methods</b> <b>:</b> Between May 2007 and January 2018, patients admitted with ACS were included. The patients' demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, as well as their in-hospital medical courses, were recorded. The association between place of residence (rural/urban) and in-hospital mortality due to ACS was evaluated using logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders. <b>Results:</b> Of 9088 recruited patients (mean age =61.30±12.25 y; 5557 men [61.1%]), 838 were rural residents. A positive family history of coronary artery disease (P=0.003), smoking (P=0.002), and hyperlipidemia (P=0.026), as well as a higher body mass index (P=0.013), was seen more frequently in the urban patients, while the rural patients had lower education levels (P<0.001) and higher unemployment rates (P=0.009). In-hospital mortality occurred in 135 patients (1.5%): 10 rural (1.2%) and 125 urban (1.5%) patients (P=0.465). The Firth regression model, used to adjust the effects of possible confounders, showed no significant difference concerning in-hospital mortality between the rural and urban patients (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.376 to 7.450; P=0.585). <b>Conclusion</b> <b>:</b> This study found no significant differences in receiving proper treatment and in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with ACS.</p>","PeriodicalId":39149,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Tehran University Heart Center","volume":"17 2","pages":"56-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f5/b8/JTHC-17-56.PMC9748234.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mortality from Acute Coronary Syndrome: Does Place of Residence Matter?\",\"authors\":\"Seyed Hesameddin Abbasi, Örjan Sundin, Arash Jalali, Joaquim Soares, Gloria Macassa\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/jthc.v17i2.9838\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b> <b>:</b> Current evidence shows inequality in the outcomes of rural and urban patients treated at their place of residence. This study compared in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to find whether there were differences in the outcome and received treatment. <b>Methods</b> <b>:</b> Between May 2007 and January 2018, patients admitted with ACS were included. The patients' demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, as well as their in-hospital medical courses, were recorded. The association between place of residence (rural/urban) and in-hospital mortality due to ACS was evaluated using logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders. <b>Results:</b> Of 9088 recruited patients (mean age =61.30±12.25 y; 5557 men [61.1%]), 838 were rural residents. A positive family history of coronary artery disease (P=0.003), smoking (P=0.002), and hyperlipidemia (P=0.026), as well as a higher body mass index (P=0.013), was seen more frequently in the urban patients, while the rural patients had lower education levels (P<0.001) and higher unemployment rates (P=0.009). In-hospital mortality occurred in 135 patients (1.5%): 10 rural (1.2%) and 125 urban (1.5%) patients (P=0.465). The Firth regression model, used to adjust the effects of possible confounders, showed no significant difference concerning in-hospital mortality between the rural and urban patients (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.376 to 7.450; P=0.585). <b>Conclusion</b> <b>:</b> This study found no significant differences in receiving proper treatment and in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with ACS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Tehran University Heart Center\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"56-61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f5/b8/JTHC-17-56.PMC9748234.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Tehran University Heart Center\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/jthc.v17i2.9838\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Tehran University Heart Center","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jthc.v17i2.9838","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mortality from Acute Coronary Syndrome: Does Place of Residence Matter?
Background: Current evidence shows inequality in the outcomes of rural and urban patients treated at their place of residence. This study compared in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to find whether there were differences in the outcome and received treatment. Methods: Between May 2007 and January 2018, patients admitted with ACS were included. The patients' demographic, clinical, and laboratory data, as well as their in-hospital medical courses, were recorded. The association between place of residence (rural/urban) and in-hospital mortality due to ACS was evaluated using logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders. Results: Of 9088 recruited patients (mean age =61.30±12.25 y; 5557 men [61.1%]), 838 were rural residents. A positive family history of coronary artery disease (P=0.003), smoking (P=0.002), and hyperlipidemia (P=0.026), as well as a higher body mass index (P=0.013), was seen more frequently in the urban patients, while the rural patients had lower education levels (P<0.001) and higher unemployment rates (P=0.009). In-hospital mortality occurred in 135 patients (1.5%): 10 rural (1.2%) and 125 urban (1.5%) patients (P=0.465). The Firth regression model, used to adjust the effects of possible confounders, showed no significant difference concerning in-hospital mortality between the rural and urban patients (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.376 to 7.450; P=0.585). Conclusion: This study found no significant differences in receiving proper treatment and in-hospital mortality between rural and urban patients with ACS.