Rosvall Maria, Chaix Basile, Lynch John, Lindström Martin, Merlo Juan
Social Epidemiology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
BMC Public Health. 2008 Feb 1;8:44. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-8-44.
Patients living under better socioeconomic circumstances often receive more active treatments after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) compared to less affluent patients. However, most previous studies were performed in countries with less comprehensive coverage for medical services. In this Swedish nation-wide longitudinal study we wanted to evaluate long-term survival after AMI in relation to socioeconomic position (SEP) and use of revascularization.
From the Swedish Myocardial Infarction Register we identified all 45 to 84-year-old patients (16,041 women and 30,366 men) alive 28 days after their first AMI during the period 1993 to 1996. We obtained detailed information on the use of revascularization, cumulative household income from the 1975 and 1990 censuses and 5-year survival after the AMI.
Patients with the highest cumulative income (adding the values of the quartile categories of income in 1975 and 1990) underwent a revascularization procedure within one month after their first AMI two to three times as often as patients with the lowest cumulative income and had half the risk of death within five years. The socioeconomic differences in the use of revascularization procedures could not be explained by differences in co-morbidity or type of hospital at first admission. Patients who underwent revascularization showed a similar lowered mortality risk in the different income groups, while there were strong socioeconomic differences in long-term mortality among patients who did not undergo revascularization.
This nationwide Swedish study showed that patients with high income had a better long-term survival after recovery from their AMI compared to patients with low income. Furthermore, even though the use of revascularization procedures is beneficial, low SEP groups receive it less often than high SEP groups.
与较贫困的患者相比,社会经济状况较好的急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者在发病后往往接受更积极的治疗。然而,此前大多数研究是在医疗服务覆盖范围较窄的国家进行的。在这项瑞典全国性纵向研究中,我们旨在评估AMI后的长期生存率与社会经济地位(SEP)及血运重建使用情况之间的关系。
我们从瑞典心肌梗死登记处识别出1993年至1996年期间首次发生AMI后存活28天的所有45至84岁患者(16041名女性和30366名男性)。我们获取了血运重建使用情况、1975年和1990年人口普查的家庭累计收入以及AMI后5年生存率的详细信息。
累计收入最高的患者(将1975年和1990年的收入四分位数类别数值相加)在首次AMI后1个月内接受血运重建手术的频率是累计收入最低患者的两到三倍,且5年内死亡风险减半。血运重建手术使用情况的社会经济差异无法用合并症差异或首次入院时的医院类型差异来解释。接受血运重建的患者在不同收入组中显示出相似的较低死亡风险,而未接受血运重建的患者在长期死亡率方面存在显著的社会经济差异。
这项瑞典全国性研究表明,与低收入患者相比,高收入AMI患者康复后的长期生存率更高。此外,尽管血运重建手术有益,但低SEP组接受该手术的频率低于高SEP组。