Suppr超能文献

急性心肌梗死后转院患者与直接入院患者的护理过渡情况

Care Transitions After Acute Myocardial Infarction for Transferred-In Versus Direct-Arrival Patients.

作者信息

Vora Amit N, Peterson Eric D, Hellkamp Anne S, Sutton Nadia R, Panacek Edward, Thomas Laine, de Lemos James A, Wang Tracy Y

机构信息

From the Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (A.N.V., E.D.P., A.S.H., L.T.); Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor (N.R.S.); Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California Davis, Sacramento (E.P.); and Cardiovascular Division, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (J.A.d.L.).

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016 Mar;9(2):109-16. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.115.002108. Epub 2016 Jan 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many patients in the United States require transfer from one hospital to another for acute myocardial infarction (MI) care. How well these transferred-in patients are transitioned back to their local community is unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used linked Medicare claims data to examine postdischarge outcomes of 39 136 patients with acute MI aged ≥65 years discharged alive from 451 US hospitals in Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines. Multivariable Cox modeling was used to compare the likelihood of outpatient clinic follow-up and risks of all-cause mortality and all-cause or cardiovascular readmission at 30 days post MI between transferred-in and direct-arrival patients. From 2007 to 2010, 14 060 of 39 136 patients (36%) required interhospital transfer for acute MI care, traveling a median of 43 miles (interquartile range, 27-68 miles; 77.6 km [interquartile range, 48.2-122.6 km]). Compared with those arriving directly, transferred-in patients with MI were slightly younger (median age, 73 versus 74; P<0.01) but less likely to have previous MI, heart failure, and previous revascularization than direct-arrival patients. Relative to direct-arrival patients, those transferred-in had a lower likelihood of outpatient follow-up within 30 days post discharge (risk-adjusted incidence, 69.9% versus 78.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.92) and higher adjusted 30-day all-cause and cardiovascular readmission risks (14.5% versus 14.0%; HRall-cause, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.15 and 9.5% versus 9.1%; HRcardiovascular, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.22). In contrast, risk-adjusted 30-day mortality was similar between transferred-in and direct arrivals (1.6% versus 1.6%; HR, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.27).

CONCLUSIONS

Transferred-in patients with acute MI are less likely to have outpatient clinic follow-up within 30 days and more likely to be readmitted within the first 30 days post discharge compared with direct-arrival patients. These results indicate room for improvement in the safe and seamless transition of care for transferred patients with MI traveling back to their home environments.

摘要

背景

在美国,许多急性心肌梗死(MI)患者需要从一家医院转至另一家医院接受治疗。这些转入患者如何顺利转回当地社区尚不清楚。

方法与结果

我们利用医保关联索赔数据,对451家美国医院在急性冠状动脉治疗与干预结果网络注册-遵循指南项目中存活出院的39136例年龄≥65岁的急性MI患者的出院后结局进行了研究。采用多变量Cox模型比较转入患者和直接入院患者在MI后30天内门诊随访的可能性、全因死亡率以及全因或心血管疾病再入院风险。2007年至2010年期间,39136例患者中有14060例(36%)因急性MI治疗需要进行院间转运,转运距离中位数为43英里(四分位间距为27 - 68英里;77.6公里[四分位间距为48.2 - 122.6公里])。与直接入院患者相比,转入的MI患者年龄稍小(年龄中位数为73岁对74岁;P<0.01),但既往有MI、心力衰竭和既往血运重建的可能性低于直接入院患者。相对于直接入院患者,转入患者出院后30天内门诊随访的可能性较低(风险调整发病率为69.9%对78.2%;风险比[HR]为0.90;95%置信区间为0.87 - 0.92),30天全因和心血管疾病再入院的调整风险较高(分别为14.5%对14.0%;全因HR为1.08;95%置信区间为1.01 - 1.15;以及9.5%对9.1%;心血管疾病HR为1.13;95%置信区间为1.04 - 1.22)。相比之下,转入患者和直接入院患者的风险调整30天死亡率相似(分别为1.6%对1.6%;HR为1.05;95%置信区间为0.86 - 1.27)。

结论

与直接入院患者相比,转入的急性MI患者在30天内进行门诊随访的可能性较小,出院后前30天内再次入院的可能性较大。这些结果表明,在将转入的MI患者安全、无缝地转回其家庭环境的护理过渡方面仍有改进空间。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验