Department of Cardiology, University Hospital of Split, Split, Croatia.
Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California.
Am J Cardiol. 2020 Aug 15;129:10-18. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.05.025. Epub 2020 May 26.
Little is known about the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on management strategies and in-hospital clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and its subtypes, and whether these trends have changed over time. All AMI hospitalizations from the National Inpatient Sample (2004 to 2014) were analyzed and stratified by zip code-based median household income (MHI) into 4 quartiles (poorest to wealthiest): 0th to 25th, 26th to 50th, 51st to 75, and 76th to 100th. Logistic regression was performed to examine the association between MHI and AMI management strategy and in-hospital clinical outcomes. A total of 6,603,709 AMI hospitalizations were analyzed. Patients in the lowest MHI group had more co-morbidities, a worse cardiovascular risk factor profile and were more likely to be female. Differences in receipt of invasive management were observed between the lowest and highest MHI quartiles, with the lowest MHI group less likely to undergo coronary angiography (63.4% vs 64.3%, p <0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (40.4% vs 44.3%, p <0.001) compared with the highest MHI group, especially in the STEMI subgroup. In multivariable analysis, the highest MHI group experienced better outcomes including lower risk (adjusted odds ratio; 95% confidence intervals) of mortality (0.88; 0.88 to 0.89), MACCE (0.91; 0.91 to 0.92) and acute ischemic stroke (0.90; 0.88 to 0.91), but higher all-cause bleeding (1.08; 1.06 to 1.09) in comparison to the lowest MHI group. In conclusion, the provision of invasive management for AMI in patients with lower SES is less than patients with higher SES and is associated with worse in-hospital clinical outcomes. This work highlights the importance of ensuring equity of access and care across all strata SES.
关于社会经济地位(SES)对急性心肌梗死(AMI)及其亚型患者的管理策略和院内临床结局的影响,以及这些趋势是否随时间而变化,人们知之甚少。对国家住院患者样本(2004 年至 2014 年)中的所有 AMI 住院患者按邮政编码为基础的家庭中位数收入(MHI)分为 4 个四分位数(最贫穷到最富有)进行分析:0 到 25 分位,26 到 50 分位,51 到 75 分位,76 到 100 分位。采用 logistic 回归分析 MHI 与 AMI 管理策略和院内临床结局之间的关系。共分析了 6603709 例 AMI 住院患者。MHI 最低组患者合并症更多,心血管危险因素谱更差,且更可能为女性。在接受侵入性治疗方面,最低 MHI 组与最高 MHI 四分位组之间存在差异,最低 MHI 组接受冠状动脉造影的可能性较小(63.4% vs 64.3%,p<0.001),经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的可能性也较小(40.4% vs 44.3%,p<0.001),与最高 MHI 组相比,尤其是 STEMI 亚组。多变量分析显示,最高 MHI 组的结局更好,包括死亡率(调整后比值比;95%置信区间)降低(0.88;0.88 至 0.89)、MACCE(0.91;0.91 至 0.92)和急性缺血性卒中(0.90;0.88 至 0.91)的风险降低,但全因出血(1.08;1.06 至 1.09)的风险增加。总之,SES 较低的 AMI 患者接受侵入性治疗的比例低于 SES 较高的患者,且与院内临床结局较差相关。这项工作强调了确保所有 SES 阶层的公平获得治疗和护理的重要性。