美国STEMI患者治疗过程和结局的制度差异

IF 14.8 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Yasser M Sammour, Safi U Khan, Haoyun Hong, Jingyuan Wu, Alexander C Fanaroff, Grant W Reed, Remy Poudel, Kathie Thomas, Zhao Ni, Abhinav Goyal, Ajay J Kirtane, Robert W Yeh, W Schuyler Jones, Sachin S Goel, Wissam A Jaber, Neal S Kleiman
{"title":"美国STEMI患者治疗过程和结局的制度差异","authors":"Yasser M Sammour, Safi U Khan, Haoyun Hong, Jingyuan Wu, Alexander C Fanaroff, Grant W Reed, Remy Poudel, Kathie Thomas, Zhao Ni, Abhinav Goyal, Ajay J Kirtane, Robert W Yeh, W Schuyler Jones, Sachin S Goel, Wissam A Jaber, Neal S Kleiman","doi":"10.1001/jamacardio.2025.1411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the criterion standard for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Achieving target first medical contact (FMC)-to-device time is a quality metric in STEMI care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe site-level variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time (≤90 minutes for primary presentations to PCI-capable hospitals and ≤120 minutes for transfers), compare treatment times according to hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume, and assess whether these aspects are associated with clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This was a retrospective cross-sectional study from the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease registry from 2020 to 2022. Patients were recruited from a multicenter quality-improvement registry across 503 US hospitals. Patients with STEMI or STEMI equivalent who underwent primary PCI were included in this analysis.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>FMC-to-device time.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Hospital performance was determined by the proportion of patients meeting target FMC-to-device time at each site. Treatment times and outcomes were compared by hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 73 826 patients were analyzed (median [IQR] age, 62 [54-71] years; 53 474 male [72.4%]). Of 60 109 patients who presented directly to PCI-capable hospitals (primary presentations), 35 783 (59.5%) achieved an FMC-to-device time of 90 minutes or less, whereas 6900 (50.3%) of 13 717 transfers had an FMC-to-device time of 120 minutes or less. There was substantial institutional variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time for both primary presentations (median [IQR], 60.8% [51.2%-68.8%]) and transfers (median [IQR], 50.0% [32.5%-66.9%]). High-performing centers met all target treatment times more frequently. Low-performing sites experienced prolonged emergency department stays, catheterization laboratory arrival-to-PCI times, and transfer delays, varying by mode of presentation. Compared with urban centers, presentation to rural hospitals did not affect the odds of meeting target FMC-to-device time for primary presentations (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 0.96-1.50) or transfers (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.50-1.47). Failure to achieve target FMC-to-device time was associated with increased in-hospital mortality risk for primary presentations (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.02-2.42) and transfers (aOR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.90-3.12). Low hospital performance was associated with increased mortality risk compared with high performance in primary presentations (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.34). Outcomes were similar between rural vs urban and low vs high primary PCI volume centers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this large cross-sectional study of patients with STEMI, there was substantial hospital-level variability in achieving target treatment times. Patients in whom target FMC-to-device time was not met and those presenting to low-performing hospitals had worse outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":14657,"journal":{"name":"JAMA cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12159851/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional Variability in Processes of Care and Outcomes Among Patients With STEMI in the US.\",\"authors\":\"Yasser M Sammour, Safi U Khan, Haoyun Hong, Jingyuan Wu, Alexander C Fanaroff, Grant W Reed, Remy Poudel, Kathie Thomas, Zhao Ni, Abhinav Goyal, Ajay J Kirtane, Robert W Yeh, W Schuyler Jones, Sachin S Goel, Wissam A Jaber, Neal S Kleiman\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamacardio.2025.1411\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the criterion standard for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Achieving target first medical contact (FMC)-to-device time is a quality metric in STEMI care.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe site-level variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time (≤90 minutes for primary presentations to PCI-capable hospitals and ≤120 minutes for transfers), compare treatment times according to hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume, and assess whether these aspects are associated with clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This was a retrospective cross-sectional study from the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease registry from 2020 to 2022. Patients were recruited from a multicenter quality-improvement registry across 503 US hospitals. Patients with STEMI or STEMI equivalent who underwent primary PCI were included in this analysis.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>FMC-to-device time.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Hospital performance was determined by the proportion of patients meeting target FMC-to-device time at each site. Treatment times and outcomes were compared by hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 73 826 patients were analyzed (median [IQR] age, 62 [54-71] years; 53 474 male [72.4%]). Of 60 109 patients who presented directly to PCI-capable hospitals (primary presentations), 35 783 (59.5%) achieved an FMC-to-device time of 90 minutes or less, whereas 6900 (50.3%) of 13 717 transfers had an FMC-to-device time of 120 minutes or less. There was substantial institutional variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time for both primary presentations (median [IQR], 60.8% [51.2%-68.8%]) and transfers (median [IQR], 50.0% [32.5%-66.9%]). High-performing centers met all target treatment times more frequently. Low-performing sites experienced prolonged emergency department stays, catheterization laboratory arrival-to-PCI times, and transfer delays, varying by mode of presentation. Compared with urban centers, presentation to rural hospitals did not affect the odds of meeting target FMC-to-device time for primary presentations (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 0.96-1.50) or transfers (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.50-1.47). Failure to achieve target FMC-to-device time was associated with increased in-hospital mortality risk for primary presentations (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.02-2.42) and transfers (aOR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.90-3.12). Low hospital performance was associated with increased mortality risk compared with high performance in primary presentations (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.34). Outcomes were similar between rural vs urban and low vs high primary PCI volume centers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this large cross-sectional study of patients with STEMI, there was substantial hospital-level variability in achieving target treatment times. Patients in whom target FMC-to-device time was not met and those presenting to low-performing hospitals had worse outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":14.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12159851/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2025.1411\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2025.1411","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是急性st段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)的诊断标准。实现首次医疗接触(FMC)到设备的目标时间是STEMI护理的质量指标。目的:描述实现目标fmc到设备时间(到有PCI能力的医院首次就诊≤90分钟,转院≤120分钟)的地点水平的可变性,根据医院性能、地点和初级PCI容量比较治疗时间,并评估这些方面是否与临床结果相关。设计、环境和参与者:这是一项来自美国心脏协会指南-冠状动脉疾病登记处2020年至2022年的回顾性横断面研究。患者从美国503家医院的多中心质量改进登记处招募。接受首次PCI治疗的STEMI或同等STEMI患者被纳入该分析。曝光:fmc到设备的时间。主要结局和措施:医院绩效由每个地点达到fmc到设备目标时间的患者比例决定。通过医院表现、地点和初始PCI容量比较治疗时间和结果。结果:共分析73例 826例患者(中位[IQR]年龄62[54-71]岁;53 男性474人[72.4%])。在60 109名直接到有pci能力的医院就诊的患者(初次就诊)中,35 783名(59.5%)患者的fmc到设备的时间为90分钟或更短,而13 717名患者中的6900名(50.3%)患者的fmc到设备的时间为120分钟或更短。在实现主要表现(中位数[IQR], 60.8%[51.2%-68.8%])和转移(中位数[IQR], 50.0%[32.5%-66.9%])的目标fmc到设备时间方面存在很大的制度差异。高绩效中心达到所有目标治疗的频率更高。表现不佳的患者在急诊室停留时间较长,到达实验室到pci的时间较长,转院时间也因就诊模式而异。与城市中心相比,到农村医院就诊不影响初次就诊时达到目标fmc到设备时间的几率(调整优势比[aOR], 1.20;95% CI, 0.96-1.50)或转移(aOR, 0.86;95% ci, 0.50-1.47)。未能达到fmc到器械的目标时间与原发性住院死亡风险增加相关(aOR, 2.21;95% CI, 2.02-2.42)和转移(aOR, 2.44;95% ci, 1.90-3.12)。与初诊表现良好的患者相比,低医院表现与死亡风险增加相关(aOR, 1.16;95% ci, 1.00-1.34)。结果在农村与城市、低与高初级PCI容量中心之间相似。结论和相关性:在这项STEMI患者的大型横断面研究中,在实现目标治疗时间方面存在大量的医院水平变异性。未达到fmc到设备目标时间的患者以及在低绩效医院就诊的患者预后较差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional Variability in Processes of Care and Outcomes Among Patients With STEMI in the US.

Importance: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the criterion standard for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Achieving target first medical contact (FMC)-to-device time is a quality metric in STEMI care.

Objectives: To describe site-level variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time (≤90 minutes for primary presentations to PCI-capable hospitals and ≤120 minutes for transfers), compare treatment times according to hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume, and assess whether these aspects are associated with clinical outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study from the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease registry from 2020 to 2022. Patients were recruited from a multicenter quality-improvement registry across 503 US hospitals. Patients with STEMI or STEMI equivalent who underwent primary PCI were included in this analysis.

Exposures: FMC-to-device time.

Main outcomes and measures: Hospital performance was determined by the proportion of patients meeting target FMC-to-device time at each site. Treatment times and outcomes were compared by hospital performance, location, and primary PCI volume.

Results: A total of 73 826 patients were analyzed (median [IQR] age, 62 [54-71] years; 53 474 male [72.4%]). Of 60 109 patients who presented directly to PCI-capable hospitals (primary presentations), 35 783 (59.5%) achieved an FMC-to-device time of 90 minutes or less, whereas 6900 (50.3%) of 13 717 transfers had an FMC-to-device time of 120 minutes or less. There was substantial institutional variability in achieving target FMC-to-device time for both primary presentations (median [IQR], 60.8% [51.2%-68.8%]) and transfers (median [IQR], 50.0% [32.5%-66.9%]). High-performing centers met all target treatment times more frequently. Low-performing sites experienced prolonged emergency department stays, catheterization laboratory arrival-to-PCI times, and transfer delays, varying by mode of presentation. Compared with urban centers, presentation to rural hospitals did not affect the odds of meeting target FMC-to-device time for primary presentations (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 0.96-1.50) or transfers (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.50-1.47). Failure to achieve target FMC-to-device time was associated with increased in-hospital mortality risk for primary presentations (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.02-2.42) and transfers (aOR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.90-3.12). Low hospital performance was associated with increased mortality risk compared with high performance in primary presentations (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.34). Outcomes were similar between rural vs urban and low vs high primary PCI volume centers.

Conclusions and relevance: In this large cross-sectional study of patients with STEMI, there was substantial hospital-level variability in achieving target treatment times. Patients in whom target FMC-to-device time was not met and those presenting to low-performing hospitals had worse outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA cardiology
JAMA cardiology Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
45.80
自引率
1.70%
发文量
264
期刊介绍: JAMA Cardiology, an international peer-reviewed journal, serves as the premier publication for clinical investigators, clinicians, and trainees in cardiovascular medicine worldwide. As a member of the JAMA Network, it aligns with a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications. Published online weekly, every Wednesday, and in 12 print/online issues annually, JAMA Cardiology attracts over 4.3 million annual article views and downloads. Research articles become freely accessible online 12 months post-publication without any author fees. Moreover, the online version is readily accessible to institutions in developing countries through the World Health Organization's HINARI program. Positioned at the intersection of clinical investigation, actionable clinical science, and clinical practice, JAMA Cardiology prioritizes traditional and evolving cardiovascular medicine, alongside evidence-based health policy. It places particular emphasis on health equity, especially when grounded in original science, as a top editorial priority.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信