Clinical practice guidelines in unstable angina improve clinical outcomes by assuring early intensive medical treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the influence of clinical practice guidelines on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in unstable angina and the effectiveness of guideline reminders on implementing practice guidelines, two groups of medium and high risk patients with unstable angina were compared. BACKGROUND: New guidelines have been published by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) for evaluating and managing patients with unstable angina. The impact of these guidelines to improve the quality of care has never been tested. METHODS: Group 1 included 338 consecutive medium or high risk patients admitted before publication of the AHCPR guidelines, and group 2 consisted of 181 consecutive similar risk patients admitted after institution of the AHCPR guideline reminders at this institution. Dissemination of clinical practice guidelines was ensured by a grand rounds lecture and by posting guideline reminders on all group 2 patients' charts within 24 h of admission. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in terms of most baseline characteristics, including hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, hypertension, smoking history, baseline ST segment depression and previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Group 1 patients were older (68+/-13 vs. 63+/-16 years, p = 0.001) and more frequently had a previous myocardial infarction (39% vs. 22%, p = 0.001). Group 2 patients more frequently required intravenous nitroglycerin to control the index episode of chest pain (43% vs. 34%, p = 0.003). Group 2 patients more frequently received aspirin (96% vs. 88%, p = 0.009) during admission and underwent coronary angiography (71% vs. 58%, p = 0.006). More importantly, group 2 patients received oral beta-blockers (p = 0.008), aspirin and coronary angiography (p = 0.001) earlier than group 1 patients and experienced recurrent angina (29% vs. 54%) and myocardial infarction or death less frequently (3% vs. 9%, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: In unstable angina, clinical practice guidelines were associated with greater use of aspirin and coronary angiography and greater use and earlier administration of beta-blockers. Variation in drug use over time was also reduced. Objective improvement in clinical outcome was also noted. Thus, practice guidelines improve the quality of care of patients with unstable angina.

Improved risk stratification in unstable angina: identification of patients at low risk for in-hospital cardiac events by admission echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Current protocols for risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain syndromes rely on clinical parameters and are oriented toward identification of patients at high risk for adverse cardiac events; however, this paradigm for risk stratification does not adequately address the observation that adverse cardiac events are relatively uncommon in this population. In an era of cost containment, consideration also should be given to identification of patients at low risk for adverse cardiac events, who may be safely discharged without expensive inpatient hospitalization. HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to develop echocardiographic predictors that identify unstable angina patients at low risk for adverse cardiac events and that discriminate between low- and high-risk patients. METHODS: The predictive accuracy of retrospectively determined echocardiographic predictors were compared in a population-based sample of 66 consecutive unstable angina patients undergoing echocardiography within 24 h of admission. RESULTS: Echocardiographic predictors of adverse events included wall motion score index > or = 0.2, ejection fraction < or = 40%, and mitral regurgitation severity > 2. One or more echocardiographic predictors of adverse events were present in 32 patients (48%). A composite echocardiographic predictor of adverse events was specific, had a high positive predictive value for the identification of high-risk patients, and discriminated between unstable angina patients at high and low risk for adverse cardiac events. CONCLUSION: Echocardiographic predictors of adverse events are specific and discriminate between unstable angina patients at high and low risk for adverse cardiac events.

Clinical predictors easily obtained at presentation predict resource utilization in unstable angina.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a risk prediction model for patients with unstable angina would predict resource utilization. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-five consecutive patients admitted for unstable angina to a tertiary care university-based medical center were prospectively evaluated from June 1, 1992, to June 30, 1995. The proportion of patients receiving coronary angiography, coronary angioplasty, and coronary artery bypass grafting were analyzed according to four risk groups on the basis of a previously published model: Group 1, <2% risk of major complication; Group 2, 2.1% to 5% risk; Group 3, 5.1 % to 15% risk; and Group 4, >15.1 % risk. Hospital length of stay and estimated cost of hospitalization based on DRG and specific payer ratio of cost-to-charge were also compared between groups. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the influence of estimated risk and procedures on hospital costs. The four groups were well matched for gender, hypertension, tobacco history, and previous percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and myocardial infarction. Group 4 had a higher incidence of previous coronary bypass grafting (35% vs 10%, p=0.001) and triple vessel or left main coronary artery disease compared with Group 1 (44% vs 13%, p=0.041). Group 4 patients were more likely to be admitted to the coronary care unit compared with Group 2 or Group 1 patients (80% vs Group 1: 51% [p= 0.001]; and vs Group 2: 53% [p=0.001]), more likely to receive heparin (87% vs 71%, p=0.007), and more likely to receive a beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker (89% vs 74%, p=0.008) than Group 1. Coronary angioplasty rates were similar for all groups, but Group 4 patients were more likely to receive coronary bypass grafting than Group 2 or Group 1 (27% vs Group 2: 12%, p=0.004 and vs Group 1: 8%, p=0.002). Hospital length of stay was highest in Group 4 and lowest for Group 1. Average hospital costs were significantly less in Group 3 than in Group 4, but higher than in Group 1. Multivariate analysis determined a dependency of costs on risk group with Group 2 having costs 31.4% (95% CI=9.8 to 57.2), Group 3 46.7% (24, 3 to 73.1), and Group 4 75% (46.9 to 110.7) higher than Group 1. The use of procedures also significantly increased costs, with PTCA-treated patients having a 44.9% (26.7 to 65.7) increase in costs compared with medically treated patients, and surgically treated patients having a 204.7% increase in costs. CONCLUSION: Resource utilization as assessed by the use of revascularization procedures, length of stay, and hospital costs are influenced by patient acuity estimated from a prediction model on the basis of estimated risk of cardiac complications. The model exerts independent influence on cost even after adjustment for various procedures. The use of revascularization procedures, especially coronary artery surgery, remains a large determinant of hospital cost.

Comparison of heparin therapy for < or = 48 hours to > 48 hours in unstable angina pectoris.

Of 450 consecutive patients with unstable angina admitted to a tertiary care, university-based medical center over a 24-month period, 334 were administered heparin and aspirin for some length of time. Two groups of 98 patients matched for acuity and gender at baseline were treated with either < or = 48 hours (group 1) or > 48 hours (group 2) of heparin. The acuity model used in this study incorporates 6 factors: age, recent myocardial infarction, treatment with intravenous nitroglycerin, previous therapy with beta blockers or calcium antagonists, baseline ST depression, and diabetes. Despite similar risks and overall clinical outcome, group 2 had significantly more myocardial infarction or death after 48 hours than group 1 (p = 0.01). In part, this was due to a delay in the performance of coronary angiography (2.8 +/- 1.4 vs 3.5 +/- 15 days, p = 0.01), coronary intervention (2.7 +/- 1.8 vs 5.1 +/- 2.3 days, p = 0.01), and bypass surgery (3.8 +/- 3.6 vs 7.0 +/- 5.6 days, p = 0.02). There was no difference between groups regarding the success of coronary intervention (90% vs 88%, p = NS). Heparin duration was influenced by the finding of intracoronary thrombus or ulceration on angiography before revascularization, as each finding was seen more often in group 2 (thrombus, 12% vs 24%; ulceration, 38% vs 60%). These results suggest that the optimal duration of heparin therapy is up to 48 hours after admission in unstable angina; a longer time period is associated with increased adverse consequences.

Risk stratification in unstable angina. Prospective validation of the Braunwald classification.

OBJECTIVES: To validate the Braunwald classification of unstable angina as a predictor of in-hospital cardiac complications; to determine which factors of the Braunwald classification contributed significantly to this prediction; and to devise a method of combining these predictive factors into an overall odds ratio for complications. DESIGN: A validation cohort of consecutive patients followed prospectively for in-hospital cardiac complications including myocardial infarction and death. SETTING: A community-based academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 393 patients admitted consecutively to the coronary care and intermediate care units with unstable angina. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Major cardiac complications including death, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and severe ventricular dysrhythmias. RESULTS: Multiple logistic regression analysis identified four clinical factors used in the Braunwald classification that predicted the in-hospital occurrence of major cardiac complications: (1) myocardial infarction within less than 14 days (odds ratio [OR], 5.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.92 to 16.97); (2) need for intravenous nitroglycerin (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.31 to 4.17); (3) lack of beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker prior to admission (OR, 3.83; 95% CI, 1.55 to 9.42); and (4) baseline ST depression (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.45 to 5.47). Two other clinical factors, diabetes and age, were also significant predictors. Validation of this model using parametric and nonparametric bootstrap techniques revealed excellent agreement between the CIs for adjusted ORs derived from the multiple logistic regression and those derived from the bootstrap. CONCLUSIONS: The classification of unstable angina proposed by Braunwald includes four factors that predict risk of major in-hospital cardiac complications. Specific factors used in this classification can be combined with diabetes and age to better stratify risk of major cardiac complications in this disorder using a simpler model.