PURPOSE: Older patients are less likely to receive guideline-recommended medical therapies during acute myocardial infarction. However, it is unclear whether the lower rates of treatment reflect elderly patients' increased number of comorbid conditions, physician or hospital effects, or true age-associated variation. Furthermore, it is unclear whether age-associated variations in care are similar or vary among treatments. METHODS: We evaluated 146,718 Medicare patients from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project aged > or =65 years who were hospitalized between 1994 and 1996 with a confirmed myocardial infarction, to ascertain whether rates of acute reperfusion therapy and use of aspirin (admission, discharge), beta-blockers (admission, discharge), and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors varied among patients aged 65 to 69 years, 70 to 74 years, 75 to 79 years, 80 to 84 years, and > or =85 years. We identified patients who were considered eligible for each therapy and who had no treatment contraindications. Associations between age and use of therapy were assessed, adjusting for patient, physician, hospital, and geographic factors. RESULTS: Adjusted treatment rates were higher for patients aged 65 to 69 years than for patients aged > or =85 years for acute reperfusion therapy (54.4% vs. 31.2%, P <0.0001 for trend), beta-blockers (admission: 52.2% vs. 43.8%, P <0.0001 for trend; discharge: 61.8% vs. 55.3%, P <0.0001 for trend), aspirin at admission (73.8% vs. 71.0%, P <0.0001 for trend), and ACE inhibitors (61.6% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.02 for trend); there were no differences in the prescription of aspirin at discharge (76.0% vs. 73.6%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients are less likely to receive guideline-indicated therapies when hospitalized with myocardial infarction. The effects of age were largest for acute reperfusion and smallest for aspirin.
PURPOSE: Older patients are less likely to receive guideline-recommended medical therapies during acute myocardial infarction. However, it is unclear whether the lower rates of treatment reflect elderly patients' increased number of comorbid conditions, physician or hospital effects, or true age-associated variation. Furthermore, it is unclear whether age-associated variations in care are similar or vary among treatments. METHODS: We evaluated 146,718 Medicare patients from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project aged > or =65 years who were hospitalized between 1994 and 1996 with a confirmed myocardial infarction, to ascertain whether rates of acute reperfusion therapy and use of aspirin (admission, discharge), beta-blockers (admission, discharge), and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors varied among patients aged 65 to 69 years, 70 to 74 years, 75 to 79 years, 80 to 84 years, and > or =85 years. We identified patients who were considered eligible for each therapy and who had no treatment contraindications. Associations between age and use of therapy were assessed, adjusting for patient, physician, hospital, and geographic factors. RESULTS: Adjusted treatment rates were higher for patients aged 65 to 69 years than for patients aged > or =85 years for acute reperfusion therapy (54.4% vs. 31.2%, P <0.0001 for trend), beta-blockers (admission: 52.2% vs. 43.8%, P <0.0001 for trend; discharge: 61.8% vs. 55.3%, P <0.0001 for trend), aspirin at admission (73.8% vs. 71.0%, P <0.0001 for trend), and ACE inhibitors (61.6% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.02 for trend); there were no differences in the prescription of aspirin at discharge (76.0% vs. 73.6%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients are less likely to receive guideline-indicated therapies when hospitalized with myocardial infarction. The effects of age were largest for acute reperfusion and smallest for aspirin.
Authors: Susannah M Bernheim; Yongfei Wang; Elizabeth H Bradley; Frederick A Masoudi; Saif S Rathore; Joseph S Ross; Elizabeth Drye; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Shaheeda Ahmed; Elliott M Antman; Sabina A Murphy; Robert P Giugliano; Christopher P Cannon; Harvey White; David A Morrow; Eugene Braunwald Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Els H Vandecasteele; Marc De Buyzere; Sofie Gevaert; Antoine de Meester; Carl Convens; Philippe Dubois; Jean Boland; Peter Sinnaeve; Herbert De Raedt; Pascal Vranckx; Patrick Coussement; Patrick Evrard; Christophe Beauloye; Marc Renard; Marc J Claeys Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-07-26 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Kennon Heard; Scott Wilber; Adit A Ginde; Kirk Stiffler; Lowell W Gerson; Neal S Wenger; Douglas K Miller Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Meredith B Rosenthal; Andrea B Troxel; Kevin G Volpp; Walter F Stewart; Thomas D Sequist; James B Jones; AnneMarie G Hirsch; Karen Hoffer; Jingsan Zhu; Wenli Wang; Amanda Hodlofski; Darra Finnerty; Jack J Huang; David A Asch Journal: Med Care Res Rev Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Ahmad Syadi Mahmood Zuhdi; Wan Azman Wan Ahmad; Rafdzah Ahmad Zaki; Jeevitha Mariapun; Rosli Mohd Ali; Norashikin Md Sari; Muhammad Dzafir Ismail; Sim Kui Hian Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Anne Spinewine; Christian Swine; Soraya Dhillon; Bryony Dean Franklin; Paul M Tulkens; Léon Wilmotte; Vincent Lorant Journal: BMJ Date: 2005-08-10
Authors: Michael A Steinman; Andrew R Zullo; Yoojin Lee; Lori A Daiello; W John Boscardin; David D Dore; Siqi Gan; Kathy Fung; Sei J Lee; Kiya D R Komaiko; Vincent Mor Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 21.873