Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25801759›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2015

Differential time trends of outcomes and costs of care for acute myocardial infarction hospitalizations by ST elevation and type of intervention in the United States, 2001-2011.

Takehiro Sugiyama, Kohei Hasegawa, Yasuki Kobayashi, Osamu Takahashi, Tsuguya Fukui, Yusuke Tsugawa

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Implementation of the ESC STEMI guidelines in female and elderly patients over a 20-year period in a large German registry.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Takehiro SugiyamaDepartment of Clinical Study and Informatics, Center for Clinical Sciences, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan (T.S.) Department of Public Health/Health Policy, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan (T.S., Y.K.).
Kohei HasegawaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (K.H.).
Yasuki KobayashiDepartment of Public Health/Health Policy, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan (T.S., Y.K.).
Osamu TakahashiCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan (O.T., T.F.).
Tsuguya FukuiCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan (O.T., T.F.).
Yusuke TsugawaDivision of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (Y.T.) Harvard Interfaculty Initiative in Health Policy, Cambridge, MA (Y.T.).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known whether time trends of in-hospital mortality and costs of care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) differ by type of AMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] vs. non-ST-elevation [NSTEMI]) and by the intervention received (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG], or no intervention) in the United States. METHODS AND

resultsWe conducted a serial cross-sectional study of all hospitalizations for AMI aged 30 years or older using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2001-2011 (1,456,154 discharges; a weighted estimate of 7,135,592 discharges). Hospitalizations were stratified by type of AMI and intervention, and the time trends of in-hospital mortality and hospital costs were examined for each combination of the AMI type and intervention, after adjusting for both patient- and hospital-level characteristics. Compared with 2001, adjusted in-hospital mortality improved significantly for NSTEMI patients in 2011, regardless of the intervention received (PCI odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.83; CABG OR 0.57, 0.45 to 0.72; without intervention OR 0.61, 0.57 to 0.65). As for STEMI, a decline in adjusted in-hospital mortality was significant for those who underwent PCI (OR 0.83; 0.73 to 0.94); however, no significant improvement was observed for those who received CABG or without intervention. Hospital costs per hospitalization increased significantly for patients who underwent intervention, but not for those without intervention.

conclusionsIn the United States, the decrease in in-hospital mortality and the increase in costs differed by the AMI type and the intervention received. These non-uniform trends may be informative for designing effective health policies to reduce the health and economic burdens of AMI.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCoronary Artery BypassCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualFemaleHealth Services ResearchHospital CostsHospitalizationHospital MortalityHumansIncidenceLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial Infarctionacute myocardial infarctionhospital costsin‐hospital mortalitytime trend

Identifiers

PMID25801759
PMCPMC4392430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.