Trial reportJAMA2018
Effect of a Quality Improvement Intervention on Clinical Outcomes in Patients in India With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The ACS QUIK Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02256657 (Acute Coronary Syndrome Quality Improvement in Kerala), which is not on this map. Cited by 56 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Acute Coronary Syndrome Quality Improvement in Kerala (ACS QUIK) Cluster Randomized, Stepped Wedge Multi-center Implementation of a Locally-Developed Quality Improvement Toolkit
Who cites it
56 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of quality improvement interventions in improving cardiovascular disease-related outcomes in primary and tertiary care: A systematic review and meta-analyses.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Exploring the content and delivery of feedback facilitation co-interventions: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- The effectiveness of continuous quality improvement for developing professional practice and improving health care outcomes: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2020Pooled it
- Hospital-Based Quality Improvement Interventions for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2019Pooled it
- Hospital-based quality improvement interventions for patients with heart failure: a systematic review.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2019Pooled it
- Low quality cardiovascular care is important coronary risk factor in India.Indian heart journal · 2018Pooled it
- Assessing a multicomponent quality improvement strategy for chronic care of cardiovascular diseases in India: The C-QIP randomized feasibility trial.PLoS medicine · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes and Diabetes: Results from ACS QUIK Trial in India.Global heart · 2024Trial
- Using increased trust in medical researchers to increase minority recruitment: The RECRUIT cluster randomized clinical trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Trial
- Sex disparities in the presentation, management and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome: insights from the ACS QUIK trial.Open heart · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Effect of a Quality of Care Improvement Initiative in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Resource-Constrained Hospitals in China: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA cardiology · 2019Trial
- Model-robust standardization in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2026Article
- Performance of the Grace ACS Risk Score in Predicting in-Hospital and Six-Month Mortality in Patients with ACS: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
- Long-Term Implementation and Effectiveness of a Quality Improvement Intervention for Myocardial Infarction in Tanzania.Annals of global health · 2026Article
- South Asian Representation in Cardiovascular Disease Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Wide heterogeneity exists in acute myocardial infarction treatment and outcomes in India. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a locally adapted quality improvement tool kit on clinical outcomes and process measures in Kerala, a southern Indian state. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized, stepped-wedge clinical trial conducted between November 10, 2014, and November 9, 2016, in 63 hospitals in Kerala, India, with a last date of follow-up of December 31, 2016. During 5 predefined steps over the study period, hospitals were randomly selected to move in a 1-way crossover from the control group to the intervention group. Consecutively presenting patients with acute myocardial infarction were offered participation. Interventions: Hospitals provided either usual care (control group; n = 10 066 participants [step 0: n = 2915; step 1: n = 2649; step 2: n = 2251; step 3: n = 1422; step 4; n = 829; step 5: n = 0]) or care using a quality improvement tool kit (intervention group; n = 11 308 participants [step 0: n = 0; step 1: n = 662; step 2: n = 1265; step 3: n = 2432; step 4: n = 3214; step 5: n = 3735]) that consisted of audit and feedback, checklists, patient education materials, and linkage to emergency cardiovascular care and quality improvement training. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death, reinfarction, stroke, or major bleeding using standardized definitions at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the primary outcome's individual components, 30-day cardiovascular death, medication use, and tobacco cessation counseling. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to account for clustering and temporal trends. Results: Among 21 374 eligible randomized participants (mean age, 60.6 [SD, 12.0] years; n = 16 183 men [76%] ; n = 13 689 [64%] with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction), 21 079 (99%) completed the trial. The primary composite outcome was observed in 5.3% of the intervention participants and 6.4% of the control participants. The observed difference in 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event rates between the groups was not statistically significant after adjustment (adjusted risk difference, -0.09% [95% CI, -1.32% to 1.14%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.80-1.21]). The intervention group had a higher rate of medication use including reperfusion but no effect on tobacco cessation counseling. There were no unexpected adverse events reported. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction in Kerala, India, use of a quality improvement intervention compared with usual care did not decrease a composite of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events. Further research is needed to understand the lack of efficacy. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02256657.
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.