Efficacy of in-hospital multidimensional interventions of secondary prevention after acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_D9D9E325DE62
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Efficacy of in-hospital multidimensional interventions of secondary prevention after acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal
Circulation
Author(s)
Auer R., Gaume J., Rodondi N., Cornuz J., Ghali W.A.
ISSN
1524-4539
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2008
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
117
Number
24
Pages
3109-3117
Language
english
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Secondary prevention programs for patients experiencing an acute coronary syndrome have been shown to be effective in the outpatient setting. The efficacy of in-hospital prevention interventions administered soon after acute cardiac events is unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether in-hospital, patient-level interventions targeting multiple cardiovascular risk factors reduce all-cause mortality after an acute coronary syndrome. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a prespecified search strategy, we included controlled clinical trials and before-after studies of secondary prevention interventions with at least a patient-level component (ie, education, counseling, or patient-specific order sets) initiated in hospital with outcomes of mortality, readmission, or reinfarction rates in acute coronary syndrome patients. We classified the interventions as patient-level interventions with or without associated healthcare provider-level interventions and/or system-level interventions. Twenty-six studies met our inclusion criteria. The summary estimate of 14 studies revealed a relative risk of all-cause mortality of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.92; n=37,585) at 1 year. However, the apparent benefit depended on study design and level of intervention. The before-after studies suggested reduced mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.90; n=3680 deaths), whereas the RR was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.44; n=99 deaths) among the controlled clinical trials. Only interventions including a provider- or system-level intervention suggested reduced mortality compared with patient-level-only interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for in-hospital, patient-level interventions for secondary prevention is promising but not definitive because only before-after studies suggest a significant reduction in mortality. Future research should formally test which components of interventions provide the greatest benefit.
Keywords
Acute Coronary Syndrome, Cause of Death, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Inpatients, Patient Selection, Recurrence
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
22/01/2009 15:09
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:59
Usage data