ArticleBMJ open2017
Long-term outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in countries with different socioeconomic environments: an international prospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Management and clinical outcome of myocardial infarction in Kosovo: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Socioeconomic Status and Prognosis of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Managed by the Emergency-Intervention "Codi IAM" Network.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluation and Comparison of the STIMUL Extended and Simplified Risk Scores for Predicting Two-Year Death in Patients Following ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospital-based data on the impact of socioeconomic environment on long-term survival after myocardial infarction (MI) are lacking. We compared outcome and quality of secondary prevention in patients after MI living in three different socioeconomic environments including patients from three tertiary-care teaching hospitals with similar service population size in Switzerland, Poland and Ukraine.
methodsThis is a prospective cohort study of patients with a first MI in three different tertiary-care teaching hospitals in Bern (Switzerland), Gdansk (Poland) and Lutsk (Ukraine) during the acute phase in the year 2010 and follow-up of these patients with a questionnaire and, if necessary, telephone interviews 3.5 years after the acute event. The study cohort comprises all consecutive patients hospitalised in every one of the three study centres during the year 2010 for a first MI in the age ≤75 years who survived ≥30 days.
resultsThe proportion of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) was high in Gdansk (Poland) (80%) and in Lutsk (Ukraine) (74%), while the ratio of STEMIs to non-STEMIs was nearly 50:50 in Bern (Switzerland) (50.6% STEMIs). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was the first choice therapy both in Bern (Switzerland) (100%) and in Gdansk (Poland) (92%), while it was not performed at all in Lutsk (Ukraine). We found substantial differences in treatment and also in secondary prevention interventions including cardiac rehabilitation. All-cause mortality at 3.5 year follow-up was 4.6% in Bern (Switzerland), 8.5% in Gdansk (Poland) and 14.6% in Lutsk (Ukraine).
conclusionSubstantial differences in treatment and secondary prevention measures according to low-income, middle-income and high-income socioeconomic situation are associated with a threefold difference in mortality 3.5 years after the acute event. Countries with low socioeconomic environment should increase efforts and be supported to improve care including secondary prevention in particular for MI patients. A greater number of PCIs per million inhabitants itself does not guarantee lower mortality scores.
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.