Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34482404›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2022

Impact of the admitting ward on care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from a national registry.

Saadiq M Moledina, Ahmad Shoaib, Louise Y Sun, Phyo K Myint, Rafail A Kotronias, Benoy N Shah, Chris P Gale, Hude Quan, Rodrigo Bagur, Mamas A Mamas

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Machine learning prediction of mortality in Acute Myocardial Infarction.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023
    Article
  9. Narrowing disparities in PCI outcomes in women; From risk assessment, to referral pathways and outcomes.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2022
    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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Saadiq M MoledinaKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6934-7684
Ahmad ShoaibKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, UK.
Louise Y SunDivision of Cardiac Anesthesiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3381-3115
Phyo K MyintInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK.
Rafail A KotroniasDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, BHF Centre of Research Excellence, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Benoy N ShahDepartment of Cardiology, Wessex Cardiac Centre, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Chris P GaleLeeds Institute for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Hude QuanCentre for Health Informatics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Rodrigo BagurKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, UK.
Mamas A MamasKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, UK.
Keele University · GBUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Ottawa · CAUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsLittle is known about the association between the type of admission ward and quality of care and outcomes for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). METHODS AND

resultsWe analysed data from 337 155 NSTEMI admissions between 2010 and 2017 in the UK Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) database. The cohort was dichotomised according to receipt of care either on a medical (n = 142,876) or cardiac ward, inclusive of acute cardiac wards and cardiac care unit (n = 194,279) on admission to hospital. Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were younger (median age 70 y vs. 75 y, P < 0.001), and less likely to be female (33% vs. 40%, P < 0.001). Independent factors associated with admission to a cardiac ward included ischaemic ECG changes (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.18-1.23) and prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.16-1.22). Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were more likely to receive optimal pharmacotherapy with statin (85% vs. 81%, P < 0.001) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (91% vs. 88%, P < 0.001) on discharge, undergo invasive coronary angiography (78% vs. 59%, P < 0.001), and receive revascularisation in the form of PCI (52% vs. 36%, P < 0.001). Following multivariable logistic regression, the odds of inhospital all-cause mortality (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.70-0.81) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78-0.91) were lower in patients admitted to a cardiac ward.

conclusionPatients with NSTEMI admitted to a cardiac ward on admission were more likely to receive guideline directed management and had better clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Non-ST Elevated Myocardial InfarctionPercutaneous Coronary InterventionST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionAgedFemaleHospitalsHumansMaleRegistriesCardiac WardCCUMortalityNSTEMI

Identifiers

PMID34482404
PMCPMC9442842
OpenAlexW3197724944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.