Improving Care of STEMI in the United States 2008 to 2012.

Background We aimed to determine the change in treatment strategies and times to treatment over the first 5 years of the Mission: Lifeline program. Methods and Results We assessed pre- and in-hospital care and outcomes from 2008 to 2012 for patients with ST -segment-elevation myocardial infarction at US hospitals, using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines Registry. In-hospital adjusted mortality was calculated including and excluding cardiac arrest as a reason for primary percutaneous coronary intervention delay. A total of 147 466 patients from 485 hospitals were analyzed. There was a decrease in the proportion of eligible patients not treated with reperfusion (6.2% versus 3.3%) and treated with fibrinolytic therapy (13.4% versus 7.0%). Median time from symptom onset to first medical contact was unchanged (≈50 minutes). Use of prehospital ECGs increased (45% versus 71%). All major reperfusion times improved: median first medical contact-to-device for emergency medical systems transport to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals (93 to 84 minutes), first door-to-device for transfers for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (130 to 112 minutes), and door-in-door-out at non-percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals (76 to 62 minutes) (all P<0.001 over 5 years). Rates of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, and overall in-hospital mortality increased (5.7% to 6.3%). Adjusted mortality excluding patients with known cardiac arrest decreased by 14% at 3 years and 25% at 5 years ( P<0.001). Conclusions Quality of care for patients with ST -segment-elevation myocardial infarction improved over time in Mission: Lifeline, including increased use of reperfusion therapy and faster times-to-treatment. In-hospital mortality improved for patients without cardiac arrest but did not appear to improve overall as the number of these high-risk patients increased.

Regional Systems of Care Demonstration Project: American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of patients fail to meet ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guideline goals recommending a first medical contact-to-device time of <90 minutes for patients directly presenting to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals and <120 minutes for transferred patients. We sought to increase the proportion of patients treated within guideline goals by organizing coordinated regional reperfusion plans. METHODS: We established leadership teams, coordinated protocols, and provided regular feedback for 484 hospitals and 1253 emergency medical services (EMS) agencies in 16 regions across the United States. RESULTS: Between July 2012 and December 2013, 23 809 patients presented with acute STEMI (direct to percutaneous coronary intervention hospital: 11 765 EMS transported and 6502 self-transported; 5542 transferred). EMS-transported patients differed from self-transported patients in symptom onset to first medical contact time (median, 47 versus 114 minutes), incidence of cardiac arrest (10% versus 3%), shock on admission (11% versus 3%), and in-hospital mortality (8% versus 3%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients meeting guideline goals of first medical contact-to-device time, including those directly presenting via EMS (50% to 55%; P<0.001) and transferred patients (44%-48%; P=0.002). Despite regional variability, the greatest gains occurred among patients in the 5 most improved regions, increasing from 45% to 57% (direct EMS; P<0.001) and 38% to 50% (transfers; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator demonstration project represents the largest national effort to organize regional STEMI care. By focusing on first medical contact-to-device time, coordinated treatment protocols, and regional data collection and reporting, we were able to increase significantly the proportion of patients treated within guideline goals.

Formation and function of acute stroke-ready hospitals within a stroke system of care recommendations from the brain attack coalition.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Many patients with an acute stroke live in areas without ready access to a Primary or Comprehensive Stroke Center. The formation of care facilities that meet the needs of these patients might improve their care and outcomes and guide them and emergency responders to such centers within a stroke system of care. METHODS: The Brain Attack Coalition conducted an electronic search of the English medical literature from January 2000 to December 2012 to identify care elements and processes shown to be beneficial for acute stroke care. We used evidence grading and consensus paradigms to synthesize recommendations for Acute Stroke-Ready Hospitals (ASRHs). RESULTS: Several key elements for an ASRH were identified, including acute stroke teams, written care protocols, involvement of emergency medical services and emergency department, and rapid laboratory and neuroimaging testing. Unique aspects include the use of telemedicine, hospital transfer protocols, and drip and ship therapies. Emergent therapies include the use of intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator and the reversal of coagulopathies. Although many of the care elements are similar to those of a Primary Stroke Center, compliance rates of ≥67% are suggested in recognition of the staffing, logistical, and financial challenges faced by rural facilities. CONCLUSIONS: ASRHs will form the foundation for acute stroke care in many settings. Recommended elements of an ASRH build on those proven to improve care and outcomes at Primary Stroke Centers. The ASRH will be a key component for patient care within an evolving stroke system of care.

Hospital certification for optimizing cardiovascular disease and stroke quality of care and outcomes.

Cardiovascular disease and stroke remain leading causes of mortality, disability, and rising healthcare expenditures in the United States. Although a number of organizations provide hospital accreditation, recognition, and certification programs, existing programs do not address cardiovascular disease and stroke care in a comprehensive way. Current evidence suggests mixed findings for correlation between accreditation, recognition, and certification programs and hospitals' actual quality of care and outcomes. This advisory discusses potential opportunities to develop and enhance hospital certification programs for cardiovascular disease and stroke. The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association is uniquely positioned as a patient-centered, respected, transparent healthcare organization to help drive improvements in care and outcomes for patients hospitalized with cardiovascular disease and stroke. As a part of its commitment to promoting high-quality, evidence-based care for cardiovascular and stroke patients, it is recommended that the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association explore hospital certification programs to develop truly meaningful programs to facilitate improvements in and recognition for cardiovascular disease and stroke quality of care and outcomes. Future strategies should standardize objective, unbiased assessments of hospital structural, process, and outcome performance while allowing flexibility as technology and methodology advances occur.

Recommendation to develop strategies to increase the number of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with timely access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Although evidence suggests that primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy in the majority of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), only a minority of patients with STEMI are treated with primary PCI, and of those, only a minority receive the treatment within the recommended 90 minutes after entry into the medical system. Market research conducted by the American Heart Association revealed that those involved in the care of patients with STEMI recognize the multiple barriers that prevent the prompt delivery of primary PCI and agree that it is necessary to develop systems or centers of care that will allow STEMI patients to benefit from primary PCI. The American Heart Association will convene a group of stakeholders (representing the interests of patients, physicians, emergency medical systems, community hospitals, tertiary hospitals, and payers) and quality-of-care and outcomes experts to identify the gaps between the existing and ideal delivery of care for STEMI patients, as well as the requisite policy implications. Working within a framework of guiding principles, the group will recommend strategies to increase the number of STEMI patients with timely access to primary PCI.