ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021
Adherence to recommendations for secondary prevention medications after myocardial infarction in Estonia: comparison of real-world data from 2004 to 2005 and 2017 to 2018.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conformity with guideline-directed medical therapy and clinical outcomes in secondary cardiovascular prevention-results of a German claims data analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Initial statin dose after myocardial infarction and long-term cardiovascular outcomes.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2023Article
- Undertreatment or Overtreatment With Statins: Where Are We?Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRelatively high rates of adherence to myocardial infarction (MI) secondary prevention medications have been reported, but register-based, objective real-world data is scarce. We aimed to analyse adherence to guideline-recommended medications for secondary prevention of MI in 2017 to 2018 (period II) and compare the results with data from 2004 to 2005 (period I) in Estonia.
methodsStudy populations were formed based on data from the Estonian Health Insurance Fund's database and on Estonian Myocardial Infarction Register. By linking to the Estonian Medical Prescription Centre database adherence to guideline-recommended medications for MI secondary prevention was assessed for 1 year follow-up period from the first hospitalization due to MI. Data was analysed using the defined daily dosages methodology.
resultsTotal of 6694 and 6060 cases of MI were reported in periods I and II, respectively. At least one prescription during the follow up period was found for beta-blockers in 81.0% and 83.5% (p = 0.001), for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACEi/ARB) in 76.9% and 66.0% (p < 0.001), and for statins in 44.0% and 67.0% (p < 0.001) of patients in period I and II, respectively. P2Y12 inhibitors were used by 76.4% of patients in period II. The logistic regression analysis adjusted to gender and age revealed that some drugs and drug combinations were not allocated similarly in different age and gender groups.
conclusionsIn Estonia, adherence to MI secondary prevention guideline-recommended medications has improved. But as adherence is still not ideal more attention should be drawn to MI secondary prevention through systematic guideline implementation.
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.