ArticlePloS one2014
Impact of ECG findings and process-of-care characteristics on the likelihood of not receiving reperfusion therapy in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: results of a field evaluation.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) do not receive reperfusion therapy and are known to have poorer outcomes. We aimed to perform the first population-level, integrated analysis of clinical, ECG and hospital characteristics associated with non-receipt of reperfusion therapy in patients with STEMI. METHODS AND
resultsThis systematic evaluation of STEMI care in 82 hospitals in Quebec included all patients with a discharge diagnosis of myocardial infarction, presenting with characteristic symptoms and an ECG showing STEMI as attested by at least one of two study cardiologists or left bundle branch block (LBBB). Excluding LBBB, an ECG was considered a definite STEMI diagnosis if both cardiologists scored 'certain STEMI' and ambiguous if one scored 'uncertain' or 'not STEMI'. Centers were classified according to accessibility to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI): 1) on-site PPCI; 2) routine transfer for PPCI; 3) varying mix of PPCI transfer and on-site fibrinolysis; and 4) routine on-site fibrinolysis. Of 3730 STEMI/LBBB patients, 812 (21.8%) did not receive reperfusion therapy. In multivariate analysis, likelihood of no reperfusion therapy was a function of PPCI accessibility (odds ratio [OR] for fibrinolysis versus PPCI centers = 3.1; 95% CI: 2.2-4.4), presence of LBBB (OR = 24.1; 95% CI: 17.8-32.9) and an ECG ambiguous for STEMI (OR = 4.1; 95% CI: 3.3-5.1). When the ECG was ambiguous, likelihood of no reperfusion therapy was highest in hospitals most distant from PPCI centers.
conclusionsECG diagnostic ambiguity, LBBB and PPCI accessibility are important predictors of not receiving reperfusion therapy, suggesting opportunities for improving outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.