Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27220368›Full record

ArticleCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2016

Impact of Hospitalization for Acute Myocardial Infarction on Adherence to Statins Among Older Adults.

Ian M Kronish, Joseph S Ross, Hong Zhao, Paul Muntner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Intervening on fear after acute cardiac events: Rationale and design of the INFORM randomized clinical trial.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ian M KronishFrom the Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (I.M.K.); Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital (J.S.R.); and Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (H.Z., P.M.). ik2293@columbia.edu.
Joseph S RossFrom the Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (I.M.K.); Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital (J.S.R.); and Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (H.Z., P.M.).
Hong ZhaoFrom the Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (I.M.K.); Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital (J.S.R.); and Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (H.Z., P.M.).
Paul MuntnerFrom the Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (I.M.K.); Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT (J.S.R.); Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital (J.S.R.); and Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (H.Z., P.M.).

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000040 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GINSBERG, HENRY N · 2012 to 2015
$26.2M
PTSD, Medication Adherence, and Prognosis after Acute Coronary SyndromesR01HL123368 · NHLBI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI DAVIDSON, KARINA W., KRONISH, IAN MATTHEW · 2014 to 2017
$1.6M
Impact of Publicity Reporting Hospital Outcome Measures for Older AdultsK08AG032886 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI ROSS, JOSEPH SOLOMON · 2008 to 2012
$738k
Uncontrolled hypertension - the role of medication adherence and clinical inertiaK23HL098359 · NHLBI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI KRONISH, IAN MATTHEW · 2010 to 2014
$688k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000040NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL098359NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL123368NIA NIH HHS K08 AG032886
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about the impact of hospitalization for an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) on subsequent adherence to statins. METHODS AND

resultsUsing administrative claims from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we identified a cohort of Medicare patients aged ≥65 years, hospitalized from 2007 to 2011, taking statins in the year before AMI hospitalization (n=6618). We then determined the proportion of patients nonadherent to statins (proportion of days covered <80%) in the year before AMI hospitalization who became statin adherent (proportion of days covered ≥80%) in the year after AMI hospitalization. The proportion of statin-adherent patients who became nonadherent was also studied. These proportions were compared with patients hospitalized for pneumonia (n=11 471) and patients not hospitalized (n=158 099) in 2010 and 2011. Among patients nonadherent to statins before AMI hospitalization, 37.7% became adherent after discharge. Patients hospitalized for AMI were more likely to become adherent than patients hospitalized for pneumonia (adjusted relative risk: 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.57-1.84) or patients not hospitalized (adjusted relative risk: 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.68-1.90). Among patients adherent to statins before AMI hospitalization, 32.6% became nonadherent after discharge. Those hospitalized for AMI were less likely to become nonadherent than those hospitalized for pneumonia (adjusted relative risk: 0.93; 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.98) but more likely to become nonadherent than patients without hospitalizations (adjusted relative risk: 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-1.48).

conclusionsAmong nonadherent patients, hospitalization for AMI was associated with increased likelihood of becoming adherent to statins compared with hospitalization for pneumonia or no hospitalizations. Among adherent patients, hospitalization for AMI was associated with increased likelihood of becoming nonadherent to statins compared with no hospitalizations.

Indexed as

HospitalizationMedication AdherenceAdministrative Claims, HealthcareAgedAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualDyslipidemiasFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMaleMedicareMyocardial InfarctionRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitorshealth behaviorhospitalizationHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitorsmedication adherencemyocardial infarctionsecondary prevention

Identifiers

PMID27220368
PMCPMC4956547

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceTDM
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.