Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMJ. 2015 Aug 7;351:h3913. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h3913.

Comparison of hospital variation in acute myocardial infarction care and outcome between Sweden and United Kingdom: population based cohort study using nationwide clinical registries.

Author information

1
Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London NW1 2DA, UK s.chung@ucl.ac.uk.
2
Department of Medical Sciences, Cardiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala, Sweden.
3
Cardiovascular Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
4
National Centre for Cardiovascular Prevention and Outcomes, London, UK.
5
National Institute for Health Research, Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, Bart's Health London, London, UK.
6
Department of Medicine, Huddinge, Section of Cardiology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
7
Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research and Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London NW1 2DA, UK.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the between hospital variation in use of guideline recommended treatments and clinical outcomes for acute myocardial infarction in Sweden and the United Kingdom.

DESIGN:

Population based longitudinal cohort study using nationwide clinical registries.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:

Nationwide registry data comprising all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, n=87; 119,786 patients) and the UK (NICOR/MINAP, n=242; 391,077 patients), 2004-10.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Between hospital variation in 30 day mortality of patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction.

RESULTS:

Case mix standardised 30 day mortality from acute myocardial infarction was lower in Swedish hospitals (8.4%) than in UK hospitals (9.7%), with less variation between hospitals (interquartile range 2.6% v 3.5%). In both countries, hospital level variation and 30 day mortality were inversely associated with provision of guideline recommended care. Compared with the highest quarter, hospitals in the lowest quarter for use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention had higher volume weighted 30 day mortality for ST elevation myocardial infarction (10.7% v 6.6% in Sweden; 12.7% v 5.8% in the UK). The adjusted odds ratio comparing the highest with the lowest quarters for hospitals' use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention was 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.79) in Sweden and 0.68 (0.60 to 0.76) in the UK. Differences in risk between hospital quarters of treatment for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction and secondary prevention drugs for all discharged acute myocardial infarction patients were smaller than for reperfusion treatment in both countries.

CONCLUSION:

Between hospital variation in 30 day mortality for acute myocardial infarction was greater in the UK than in Sweden. This was associated with, and may be partly accounted for by, the higher practice variation in acute myocardial infarction guideline recommended treatment in the UK hospitals. High quality healthcare across all hospitals, especially in the UK, with better use of guideline recommended treatment, may not only reduce unacceptable practice variation but also deliver improved clinical outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Clinical trials registration Clinical trials NCT01359033.

PMID:
26254445
PMCID:
PMC4528190
DOI:
10.1136/bmj.h3913
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center