Advertisement

Netherlands Heart Journal

, Volume 18, Issue 9, pp 408–415 | Cite as

Standardised pre-hospital care of acute myocardial infarction patients: MISSION! guidelines applied in practice

  • J. Z. Atary
  • M. de Visser
  • R. van den Dijk
  • J. Bosch
  • S. S. Liem
  • M. L. Antoni
  • M. Bootsma
  • E. P. Viergever
  • C. J. Kirchhof
  • I. Padmos
  • M. I. Sedney
  • H. J. van Exel
  • H. F. Verwey
  • D. E. Atsma
  • E. E. van der Wall
  • J. W. Jukema
  • M. J. Schalij
Original article
Myocardial Infarction/therapy Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary Prevention & Control Time Factors 

Abstract

Background. To improve acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care in the region ‘Hollands-Midden’ (the Netherlands), a standardised guideline-based care program was developed (MISSION!). This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of the pre-hospital part of the MISSION! program and to study potential differences in pre-hospital care between four areas of residency.

Methods. Time-to-treatment delays, AMI risk profile, cardiac enzymes, hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, and pre-AMI medication was evaluated in consecutive AMI patients (n=863, 61±13years, 75% male) transferred to the Leiden University Medical Center for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Results. Median time interval between onset of symptoms and arrival at the catheterisation laboratory was 150 (interquartile range [IQR] 101-280) minutes. The alert of emergency services to arrival at the hospital time was 48 (IQR 40-60) minutes and the door-to-catheterisation laboratory time was 23 (IQR 13-42) minutes. Despite significant regional differences in ambulance transportation times no difference in total time from onset of symptoms to arrival at the catheterisation room was found. Peak troponin T was 3.33 (IQR 1.23-7.04) µg/l, hospital stay was 2 (IQR 2-3) days and in-hospital mortality was 2.3%. Twelve percent had 0 known risk factors, 30% had one risk factor, 45% two to three risk factors and 13% had four or more risk factors. No significant differences were observed for AMI risk profiles and medication pre-AMI.

Conclusions. This study shows that a standardised regional AMI treatment protocol achieved optimal and uniformly distributed pre-hospital performance in the region ‘Hollands-Midden’, resulting in minimal time delays regardless of area of residence. Hospital stay was short and in-hospital mortality low. Of the patients, 88% had ≥1 modifiable risk factor. (Neth Heart J 2010;18:408-15.)

References

  1. 1.
    Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW, Bates ER, Green LA, Halasyamani LK, et al. 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA 2004 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: developed in collaboration With the Canadian Cardiovascular Society endorsed by the American Academy of Family Physicians: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Update the ACC/AHA 2004 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction, Writing on Behalf of the 2004 Writing Committee. Circulation. 2008;117:296-329.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van de Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A, Cokkinos DV, Falk E, Fox KA, et al. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:28-66.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Meulen A. Sterfte aan hart- en vaatziekten sinds 1970 gehalveerd; bron: Statistics Netherlands. 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hunink MG, Goldman L, Tosteson AN, Mittleman MA, Goldman PA, Williams LW, et al. The recent decline in mortality from coronary heart disease, 1980-1990. The effect of secular trends in risk factors and treatment. JAMA. 1997;277:535-42.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McGovern PG, Pankow JS, Shahar E, Doliszny KM, Folsom AR, Blackburn H, et al. Recent trends in acute coronary heart disease--mortality, morbidity, medical care, and risk factors. The Minnesota Heart Survey Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:884-90.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liem SS, van der Hoeven BL, Oemrawsingh PV, Bax JJ, van der Bom JG, Bosch J, et al. MISSION!: optimization of acute and chronic care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2007;153:14-11.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, Bates ER, Green LA, Hand M, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation. 2004;110:e82-292.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eagle KA, Montoye CK, Riba AL, DeFranco AC, Parrish R, Skorcz S, et al. Guideline-based standardized care is associated with substantially lower mortality in medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: the American College of Cardiology's Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Projects in Michigan. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1242-8.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonarow GC, Gawlinski A, Moughrabi S, Tillisch JH. Improved treatment of coronary heart disease by implementation of a Cardiac Hospitalization Atherosclerosis Management Program (CHAMP). Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:819-22.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mehta RH, Montoye CK, Faul J, Nagle DJ, Kure J, Raj E, et al. Enhancing quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: shifting the focus of improvement from key indicators to process of care and tool use: the American College of Cardiology Acute Myocardial Infarction Guidelines Applied in Practice Project in Michigan: Flint and Saginaw Expansion. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:2166-73.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schiele F, Meneveau N, Seronde MF, Caulfield F, Fouche R, Lassabe G, et al. Compliance with guidelines and 1-year mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:873-80.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clinical reality of coronary prevention guidelines: a comparison of EUROASPIRE I and II in nine countries. EUROASPIRE I and II Group. European Action on Secondary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events. Lancet. 2001;357:995-1001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kotseva K, Wood D, De BG, De Backer G, De Bacquer D, Pyorala K, Keil U. Cardiovascular prevention guidelines in daily practice: a comparison of EUROASPIRE I, II, and III surveys in eight European countries. Lancet. 2009;373:929-40.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Broer J, Bleeker JK, Bouma J, de Jongste MJ, Erdman RA, Meyboom-de JB. [Regional differences in prehospital time delay for patients with acute myocardial infarction; Rotterdam and Groningen, 1990-1995]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2000;144:78-83.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nallamothu BK, Bates ER, Herrin J, Wang Y, Bradley EH, Krumholz HM. Times to treatment in transfer patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)-3/4 analysis. Circulation. 2005;15;111:761-7.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saczynski JS, Yarzebski J, Lessard D, Spencer FA, Gurwitz JH, Gore JM, et al. Trends in prehospital delay in patients with acute myocardial infarction (from the Worcester Heart Attack Study). Am J Cardiol. 2008;102:1589-94.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Z. Atary
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. de Visser
  • R. van den Dijk
  • J. Bosch
  • S. S. Liem
  • M. L. Antoni
  • M. Bootsma
  • E. P. Viergever
  • C. J. Kirchhof
  • I. Padmos
  • M. I. Sedney
  • H. J. van Exel
  • H. F. Verwey
  • D. E. Atsma
  • E. E. van der Wall
  • J. W. Jukema
  • M. J. Schalij
  1. 1.Department of CardiologyLeiden University Medical CenterLeidenthe Netherlands
  2. 2.

Personalised recommendations