Prevalence and Predictors of Emergency Medical Service Use in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

AIM

We aim to describe prevalence of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) use, investigate factors predictive of EMS use, and determine if EMS use predicts treatment delay and mortality in our ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cohort.

METHOD

We prospectively collected data on 5,602 patients presenting with STEMI for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) transported to PCI-capable hospitals in Victoria, Australia, from 2013-2018 who were entered into the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry (VCOR). We linked this dataset to the Ambulance Victoria and National Death Index (NDI) datasets. We excluded late presentation, thrombolysed, and in-hospital STEMI, as well as patients presenting with cardiogenic shock and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

RESULTS

In total, 74% of patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI used EMS. Older age, female gender, higher socioeconomic status, and a history of prior ischaemic heart disease were independent predictors of using EMS. EMS use was associated with shorter adjusted door-to-balloon (53 vs 72 minutes, p<0.001) and symptom-to-balloon (183 vs 212 minutes, p<0.001) times. Mode of transport was not predictive of 30-day or 12-month mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

EMS use in Victoria is relatively high compared with internationally reported data. EMS use reduces treatment delay. Predictors of EMS use in our cohort are consistent with those prevalent in prior literature. Understanding the patients who are less likely to use EMS might inform more targeted education campaigns in the future.

Bloodstream infections and multidrug resistant bacteria acquisition among burns patients in Australia and New Zealand: A registry-based study

INTRODUCTION

This study interrogates infection related data in the Burns Registry of Australia and New Zealand (BRANZ), to examine associations of multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs) and blood stream infection (BSI).

METHODS

Data between July 2016 and June 2021 were analysed to determine prevalence, risk factors and outcomes associated with BSIs and MDROs: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE), carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas spp. (CRP), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacter (CRE). Data completeness and value for quality improvement activity were assessed.

RESULTS

We found a low incidence (3.4%) of the resistant organisms of interest, and no change over the study period. Fequency varied between services and increased with age and size of burn. MRSA was the commonest organism in all age groups. A positive BSI result occurred in 1.6% of patients (12.1% of cultures taken) at a median time of 10.2 days post injury. Free text identification of organisms was inconsistently documented.

CONCLUSIONS

The low rate and patterns of acquisition of MDROs of interest and BSIs is comparable with reports from countries with low incidence of massive burns. Wider adoption of a standardized laboratory reporting framework would help realise the potential of clinical quality registries to provide data which supports evidence based infection prevention initiatives.

The science of clinical quality registries

Clinical quality registries can be a transformational tool to improve healthcare delivery. Clinical registries with an incorporated quality emphasis identify evidence-practice gaps, inform quality improvement, and provide foundational research data to examine and improve health-related outcomes. For registries to create an impact it is essential that clinicians and researchers understand historical context, importance, advantages, and key criticisms. This methodological paper highlights the skills and capabilities required to build and maintain a robust clinical quality registry. This includes key measures to ensure data security, quality control, ongoing operational components, and benchmarking of care outcomes.

The protocol of a clinical quality registry for dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI): the Australian dementia network (ADNeT) Registry

Background

Dementia was identified as a priority area for the development of a Clinical Quality Registry (CQR) in Australia in 2016. The Australian Dementia Network (ADNeT) Registry is being established as part of the ADNeT initiative, with the primary objective of collecting data to monitor and enhance the quality of care and patient outcomes for people diagnosed with either dementia or Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). A secondary aim is to facilitate the recruitment of participants into dementia research and trials. This paper describes the Registry protocol.

Methods

The ADNeT Registry is a prospective CQR of patients newly diagnosed with either dementia or MCI. Eligible patients will be identified initially from memory clinics and individual medical specialists (e.g., geriatricians, psychiatrists and neurologists) involved in the diagnosis of dementia. Participants will be recruited using either an opt-out approach or waiver of consent based on three key determinants (capacity, person responsible, and communication of diagnosis). Data will be collected from four sources: participating sites, registry participants, carers, and linkage with administrative datasets. It is anticipated that the Registry will recruit approximately 10,000 participants by the end of 2023. The ADNeT registry will be developed and implemented to comply with the national operating principles for CQRs and governed by the ADNeT Registry Steering Committee.

Discussion

The ADNeT Registry will provide important data on current clinical practice in the diagnosis, treatment and care of people with dementia and MCI in Australia as well as long-term outcomes among these people. These data will help to identify variations in clinical practice and patient outcomes and reasons underlying these variations, which in turn, will inform the development of interventions to improve care and outcomes for people with dementia and MCI.

National registries: Lessons learnt from quality improvement initiatives in intensive care

National clinical quality registries (CQRs) are effective tools for improving the outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and are increasingly important as healthcare needs evolve. A high-quality ICU CQR is built from a foundation of common requirements and challenges. First, performance indicators of the structure, process, or outcomes of patient care should measure what is important. Second, high data quality is essential and can be collected and curated through standardized processes. Third, standardized mortality ratio (SMR) is a cornerstone for benchmarking ICU performance, but application requires a comprehensive understanding of its context and potential pitfalls. Fourth, data collection alone is insufficient. Quality improvement comes from closing the feedback loop by identifying and managing unwarranted practice variation. Fifth, the process of improving healthcare is fundamentally a human enterprise, subject to behavioural change, including those that modify performance. Sixth, ICU CQRs must be dynamic to meet the needs of an evolving healthcare system and stakeholders. Finally, these lessons are far from comprehensive. Sharing perspectives on the development of ICU CQRs can help maximise their value as a powerful platform for informing policy development and improving the outcomes of patients admitted to the ICU.

Medium-Term Bioresorbable Scaffold Outcomes Utilising Data From an Australian Clinical Quality Registry

BACKGROUND

Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) are a novel technology in coronary intervention. However, recent trials demonstrate higher rates of device failure compared to contemporary drug-eluting stents. This study sought to utilise a clinical quality registry to assess the medium-term safety of the Abbott Absorb BRS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA), in an Australian context.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study of 192 BRS percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) compared to 31,773 non-BRS PCIs entered in the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry from 2013 to 2017. The main outcome measure was patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) events comprising all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction (MI), and any revascularisation.

RESULTS

Bioresorbable scaffolds patients (mean age 61.6±10.5 years, 79% male) were younger, had less comorbidity, less prior PCI, fewer ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentations, lower rates of multi-lesion disease and more adjuvant devices compared to non-BRS PCI (all p<0.01). All-cause mortality was 2.1%, myocardial infarction (MI) 2.1%, scaffold thrombosis 3.1% and any revascularisation 14.1% (mean follow-up 27.4±8.9 months). POCE events occurred in 11.5% at 1 year and 16.9% at 2 years, comparable to pooled-trial data. Multivariate predictors of POCE were >1 scaffold used (odds ratio [OR] 4.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-11.4, p<0.01) and scaffold diameter ≤2.5 mm (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.4-7.6, p=0.02). Over 95% guideline adherence was achieved in six of eight patient selection criteria and four of six device deployment criteria.

CONCLUSION

In an Australian setting, BRS were used in non-complex patients. Most guidelines for use were adhered to and outcomes were comparable to pooled trial data. Clinical quality registries are effective in assessing novel treatments and technologies when potential safety concerns develop.