Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Aug 1;175(2):240-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.04.270. Epub 2014 May 9.

International comparisons of the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and the United States: The MINAP/NICOR, SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, and ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR registries

R L McNamara  1 , S C Chung  2 , T Jernberg  3 , D Holmes  4 , M Roe  4 , A Timmis  5 , S James  6 , J Deanfield  7 , G C Fonarow  8 , E D Peterson  4 , A Jeppsson  9 , H Hemingway  2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

International comparisons of the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and the United States: The MINAP/NICOR, SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, and ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR registries

R L McNamara et al. Int J Cardiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To compare management of patients with acute non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in three developed countries with national ongoing registries.

Background: Results from clinical trials suggest significant variation in care across the world. However, international comparisons in "real world" registries are limited.

Methods: We compared the use of in-hospital procedures and discharge medications for patients admitted with NSTEMI from 2007 to 2010 using the unselective MINAP/NICOR [England and Wales (UK); n=137,009], the unselective SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA (Sweden; n=45,069), and the selective ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR [United States (US); n=147,438] clinical registries.

Results: Patients enrolled among the three registries were generally similar except those in the US who were younger but had higher rates of smoking, diabetes, hypertension, prior heart failure, and prior MI than in Sweden or in UK. Angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were performed more often in the US (76% and 44%) and Sweden (65% and 42%) relative to the UK (32% and 22%). Discharge betablockers were also prescribed more often in the US (89%) and Sweden (89%) than in the UK (76%). In contrast, discharge statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB), and dual antiplatelet agents (among those not receiving PCI) were higher in the UK (92%, 79%, and 71%) than in the US (85%, 65%, 41%) and Sweden (81%, 69%, and 49%).

Conclusions: The care for patients with NSTEMI differed substantially among the three countries. These differences in care among countries provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research as well as identify opportunities for global quality improvement.

Keywords: Acute myocardial infarction; Clinical registries; International comparisons; Treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
In-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention (2007–2010). % — the percentage of patients with NSTEMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention during the hospitalization for each of the four years of the study for each registry.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Percutaneous coronary interventions in in-hospital, by age (2007–2010). % — the percentage of patients with NSTEMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention during the hospitalization over the four years of the study for each registry by age group, 60 years, 60–79 years, and ≥ 80 years.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. FRagmin and Fast Revascularization during InStability in Coronary artery disease (FRISC II) Investigators Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomized multicentre study. Lancet. 1999;354:708–715. - PubMed
    1. Cannon C.P., Weintraub W.S., Demopoulos L.A. N Engl J Med. 2001;25:1879–1887. - PubMed
    1. Fox K.A.A., Poole-Wilson P.A., Henderson R.A. Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;360:743–751. - PubMed
    1. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines 2011 ACCF/AHA focused update of the guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2007 Guideline). Developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1920–1959. - PubMed
    1. Bassand J.P., Hamm C.W., Ardissino D. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:1598–1660. - PubMed

Publication types