BACKGROUND: Extent of left ventricular dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an important predictor of subsequent morbidity and mortality. It is unclear, however, how often ejection fraction (EF) findings are evaluated in the setting of AMI, and the characteristics of patients who do not have their EF evaluated, particularly from the more generalizable perspective of a population-based investigation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine nearly 3 decade long trends (1975-2003) in the evaluation of EF in patients admitted with confirmed AMI (n = 12,760) to all greater Worcester (Massachusetts) hospitals during 14 annual periods. RESULTS: The percentage of patients undergoing evaluation of EF before hospital discharge increased substantially between 1975 (4%) and 2003 (73%). Despite these encouraging trends, approximately one quarter of patients in our most recent study year did not receive an EF evaluation. In the mid-1970s through mid-1980s, radionuclide ventriculography was typically used to assess EF, whereas echocardiography was most often used to evaluate EF during more recent periods. Predictors of not undergoing an evaluation of cardiac function included older age, shorter length of hospital stay, code status limitations, dying during hospitalization, Medicare insurance, several comorbidities, and a recent non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this community-wide study suggest that a considerable proportion of patients with AMI fail to have their EF evaluated. Efforts remain needed to optimize the use of cardiac imaging studies and link the results of these studies to improved patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Extent of left ventricular dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an important predictor of subsequent morbidity and mortality. It is unclear, however, how often ejection fraction (EF) findings are evaluated in the setting of AMI, and the characteristics of patients who do not have their EF evaluated, particularly from the more generalizable perspective of a population-based investigation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine nearly 3 decade long trends (1975-2003) in the evaluation of EF in patients admitted with confirmed AMI (n = 12,760) to all greater Worcester (Massachusetts) hospitals during 14 annual periods. RESULTS: The percentage of patients undergoing evaluation of EF before hospital discharge increased substantially between 1975 (4%) and 2003 (73%). Despite these encouraging trends, approximately one quarter of patients in our most recent study year did not receive an EF evaluation. In the mid-1970s through mid-1980s, radionuclide ventriculography was typically used to assess EF, whereas echocardiography was most often used to evaluate EF during more recent periods. Predictors of not undergoing an evaluation of cardiac function included older age, shorter length of hospital stay, code status limitations, dying during hospitalization, Medicare insurance, several comorbidities, and a recent non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this community-wide study suggest that a considerable proportion of patients with AMI fail to have their EF evaluated. Efforts remain needed to optimize the use of cardiac imaging studies and link the results of these studies to improved patient outcomes.
Authors: M D Cheitlin; J S Alpert; W F Armstrong; G P Aurigemma; G A Beller; F Z Bierman; T W Davidson; J L Davis; P S Douglas; L D Gillam Journal: Circulation Date: 1997-03-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Adrian F Hernandez; Eric J Velazquez; Scott D Solomon; Rakhi Kilaru; Rafael Diaz; Christopher M O'Connor; George Ertl; Aldo P Maggioni; Jean-Lucien Rouleau; Wiek van Gilst; Marc A Pfeffer; Robert M Califf Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-10-10
Authors: Harlan M Krumholz; Jeffrey L Anderson; Neil H Brooks; Francis M Fesmire; Costas T Lambrew; Mary Beth Landrum; W Douglas Weaver; John Whyte; Robert O Bonow; Susan J Bennett; Gregory Burke; Kim A Eagle; Jane Linderbaum; Frederick A Masoudi; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Ileana L Piña; Martha J Radford; John S Rumsfeld; James L Ritchie; John A Spertus Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-01-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Elliott M. Antman; Daniel T. Anbe; Paul Wayne Armstrong; Eric R. Bates; Lee A. Green; Mary Hand; Judith S. Hochman; Harlan M. Krumholz; Frederick G. Kushner; Gervasio A. Lamas; Charles J. Mullany; Joseph P. Ornato; David L. Pearle; Michael A. Sloan; Sidney C. Smith; Joseph S. Alpert; Jeffrey L. Anderson; David P. Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Raymond J. Gibbons; Gabriel Gregoratos; Jonathan L. Halperin; Loren F. Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Alice K. Jacobs; Joseph P. Ornato Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-08-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: M A Pfeffer; E Braunwald; L A Moyé; L Basta; E J Brown; T E Cuddy; B R Davis; E M Geltman; S Goldman; G C Flaker Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1992-09-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Francisco Lopez-Jimenez; Tauqir Y Goraya; Jens P Hellermann; Steven J Jacobsen; Guy S Reeder; Susan A Weston; Véronique L Roger Journal: Chest Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Vivian G Ng; Alexandra J Lansky; Stephanie Meller; Bernhard Witzenbichler; Giulio Guagliumi; Jan Z Peruga; Bruce Brodie; Ruchit Shah; Roxana Mehran; Gregg W Stone Journal: Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care Date: 2013-10-03
Authors: Samuel W Joffe; Armen Chalian; Dennis A Tighe; Gerard P Aurigemma; Jorge Yarzebski; Joel M Gore; Darleen Lessard; Robert J Goldberg Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Jayanta T Mukherjee; Joni R Beshansky; Robin Ruthazer; Hadeel Alkofide; Madhab Ray; David Kent; Warren J Manning; Gordon S Huggins; Harry P Selker Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 2.062