Quality improvement initiative and its impact on the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction

Citation
Rh. Mehta et al., Quality improvement initiative and its impact on the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction, ARCH IN MED, 160(20), 2000, pp. 3057-3062
Citations number
19
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine","Medical Research General Topics
Journal title
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
ISSN journal
00039926 → ACNP
Volume
160
Issue
20
Year of publication
2000
Pages
3057 - 3062
Database
ISI
SICI code
0003-9926(20001113)160:20<3057:QIIAII>2.0.ZU;2-Y
Abstract
Background: Wide variation exists in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) mana gement, leading to differences in outcomes. Objective: To assess the impact of the quality improvement initiative on ap propriate management of AMI. Design: Prospective patient identification, retrospective medical record re view. Patients: All patients with AMI discharged alive (N = 497) from our institu tion between April 1, 1995, and February 28, 1997. Main Outcome Measure: The effect of quality improvements directed at the pa tient, nurse, and physician on the adherence to key quality indicators. Results: The quality improvement initiative correlated with more frequent u se of reperfusion therapy (98%), and with aspirin use in the emergency depa rtment (95%), in ideal eligible patients. Similarly, adherence to discharge quality indicators, including use of aspirin (97%), beta -blockers (94%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (90%), and lipid-lowering agents ( 67%); avoidance of calcium channel blockers (93%); a low-fat diet (96%); sm oking cessation counseling (94%); and outpatient rehabilitation referral (7 0%) was higher, including in the very old (those aged greater than or equal to 80 years) and in women. The use of a patient education tool was associa ted with a higher adherence to most quality indicators compared with patien ts in whom this was not used: discharge aspirin (99% vs 96%; P = .02), beta -blocker (98% vs 91%, P = .002), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ( 95% vs 86%; P = .01), and lipid-lowering agent (71% vs 62%; P = .04) use; o utpatient rehabilitation (82% vs 63%; P = .001); and documentation of smoki ng cessation counseling (98% vs 87%; P = .001). Conclusions: Implementation of a quality improvement program was associated with a high adherence to quality-of-care indicators for AMI. Patient-direc ted feedback before discharge improved adherence to key indicators for AMI beyond that achieved with tools only directed at caregivers.