ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Inequities in access to life-saving cardiac devices for heart failure: a comparative analysis of Chile and Mexico.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHeart failure (HF) remains a leading cause of death in Latin America, yet access to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is limited. Chile provides HF treatment through the AUGE/GES (Universal Access with Explicit Guarantees in Health) program, while Mexico's public sector lacks such mechanisms for people without health insurance. This study aims to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with not receiving ICD or CRT-D among HF patients in Chile and Mexico.
methodsThis secondary analysis of the PLASMA study included 246 HF patients eligible for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) based on the 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS criteria. Variables included sociodemographic and clinical factors. We performed the Chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression analysis.
resultsOut of 246 eligible patients, 41.1% (n = 101) received ICD or CRT-D. The mean age of non-recipients was 64.1 years, compared to 58.5 years for recipients. Device implantation rates were higher in Chile (56%) than in Mexico (21%). Compared to Chile, Mexico had more recipients with NYHA class I (11.4% vs. 50%), even though the 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS criteria recommend ICDs and CRT-Ds mainly for symptomatic NYHA II-III patients, with stricter criteria for NYHA I (such as Left Bundle Branch Block, ≥ 40 days post-myocardial infarction, or QRS ≥ 150 ms with optimal therapy). Notably, Mexican patients had 7.6 times higher odds of not receiving a device compared to Chilean patients (aOR 7.58, 95%CI: 3.21-17.91). Care in public hospitals, older age, and NYHA III-IV were also associated with higher odds of not receiving a device, while ventricular arrhythmia and prior revascularization were associated with a lower likelihood of non-implantation (aOR 0.09, 95%CI: 0.04-0.18, and aOR 0.57, 95%CI: 0.33-0.99, respectively), indicating that these patients were substantially more likely to receive a device. No significant sex-related differences were observed.
conclusionsThere are substantial inequities in access to life-saving cardiac devices between Chile and Mexico: structural and demographic factors, particularly the supply capacity of public hospitals and older age, significantly limit access.
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.