scholarly journals Understanding Patients’ Intention to Use Digital Health Apps that Support Post-discharge Symptom Monitoring by Providers: A Survey Study in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes (Preprint)

10.2196/34452 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinying Chen ◽  
Jessica G. Wijesundara ◽  
Gabrielle E. Enyim ◽  
Lisa M. Lombardini ◽  
Ben S. Gerber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Intention To Use ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Symptom Monitoring ◽  
Health Apps ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Abstract 15408: Long-term Antithrombotic Management Patterns After Acute Coronary Syndromes: 2-[[Unsupported Character - Codename ­]]years Follow-up in the EPICOR Asia Study

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Huo ◽  
Stephen W Lee ◽  
Jitendra P Sawhney ◽  
Hyo-Soo Kim ◽  
Rungroj Krittayaphong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Index Event ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Antithrombotic Management

Introduction: Guidelines recommend dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Information on patterns and duration of DAPT use after hospital discharge in ACS patients in Asia is sparse. Objective: We describe changes in real-life antithrombotic management patterns (AMPs) up to 2-y post discharge based on data from the EPICOR Asia study (NCT01361386). Methods: This observational study enrolled 12 922 hospital survivors post ACS from 218 hospitals in 8 countries/regions in Asia. Data were collected from symptom onset for the index event (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] 51.2%, non-STEMI (NSTEMI) 19.9%, or unstable angina [UA] 28.9%), during hospitalization, at discharge and over 2 y follow-up. Results: Overall, 90.6% of patients were on DAPT at hospital discharge which declined to 79.6%, 71.8%, 53.7%, and 45.6% at 6, 12, 18, and 23 months post discharge (Fig). At discharge, most patients (87.6%) received aspirin + clopidogrel, with 79.5%, 71.8%, 53.6%, and 45.4% on this combination at 6, 12, 18, and 23 months. At discharge only 3.0% of patients received aspirin + prasugrel and 1.7% of patients received aspirin + cilostazol. Only 8.3% of patients were on single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) at discharge with 12.2%, 15.6%, 28.1%, and 30.3% on SAPT at 6, 12, 18, and 23 months post discharge; aspirin being the most commonly used single agent. No notable differences were seen among index event groups. Of the patients on DAPT at discharge, STEMI 93.4%; NSTEMI 90.2%; UA 85.9%, comparable proportions across groups remained on DAPT at 23 months follow up; STEMI 51.0%; NSTEMI 51.9%; UA 47.6%. Conclusions: Most ACS patients remain on DAPT at 12 months and around half remain at 23 months post-discharge. Further study should assess between-country differences, the benefit/risk balance from prolonged DAPT, why DAPT is discontinued before 12 months, and impact on clinical outcomes.

Cardiogenic shock in patients with acute coronary syndromes

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Thiele ◽  
Uwe Zeymer
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Circulatory Support ◽  
Intensive Care Treatment ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Cardiogenic shock complicating an acute coronary syndrome is observed in up to 10% of patients and is associated with high mortality still approaching 50%. The extent of ischaemic myocardium has a profound impact on the initial, in-hospital, and post-discharge management and prognosis of the cardiogenic shock patient. Careful risk assessment for each patient, based on clinical criteria, is mandatory, to decide appropriately regarding revascularization by primary percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, drug treatment by inotropes and vasopressors, mechanical left ventricular support, additional intensive care treatment, triage among alternative hospital care levels, and allocation of clinical resources. This chapter will outline the underlying causes and diagnostic criteria, pathophysiology, and treatment of cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes, including mechanical complications and shock from right heart failure. There will be a major focus on potential therapeutic issues from an interventional cardiologist’s and an intensive care physician’s perspective on the advancement of new therapeutical arsenals, both mechanical percutaneous circulatory support and pharmacological support. Since studying the cardiogenic shock population in randomized trials remains challenging, this chapter will also touch upon the specific challenges encountered in previous clinical trials and the implications for future perspectives in cardiogenic shock.

Towards a Post-Discharge Bleeding Risk Equation for Acute Coronary Syndromes

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 581-582
Author(s):  
T. Suk ◽  
M. Lee ◽  
I. Ternouth ◽  
G. Devlin ◽  
A.J. Kerr
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Risk Equation ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Cardiogenic shock in patients with acute coronary syndromes

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Thiele ◽  
Uwe Zeymer
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Circulatory Support ◽  
Intensive Care Treatment ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Cardiogenic shock complicating an acute coronary syndrome is observed in up to 10% of patients and is associated with high mortality still approaching 50%. The extent of ischaemic myocardium has a profound impact on the initial, in-hospital, and post-discharge management and prognosis of the cardiogenic shock patient. Careful risk assessment for each patient, based on clinical criteria, is mandatory, to decide appropriately regarding revascularization by primary percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, drug treatment by inotropes and vasopressors, mechanical left ventricular support, additional intensive care treatment, triage among alternative hospital care levels, and allocation of clinical resources. This chapter will outline the underlying causes and diagnostic criteria, pathophysiology, and treatment of cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes, including mechanical complications and shock from right heart failure. There will be a major focus on potential therapeutic issues from an interventional cardiologist’s and an intensive care physician’s perspective on the advancement of new therapeutical arsenals, both mechanical percutaneous circulatory support and pharmacological support. Since studying the cardiogenic shock population in randomized trials remains challenging, this chapter will also touch upon the specific challenges encountered in previous clinical trials and the implications for future perspectives in cardiogenic shock.

Multichannel electrocardiograms obtained by a smartwatch for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndromes: the SMARTAMI TRIAL

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
C.S Spaccarotella ◽  
A.P Polimeni ◽  
E.P Principe ◽  
A.C Curcio ◽  
S.M Migliarino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Coronary Revascularization ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Depression ◽  
Smart Watch ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Good Agreement

Abstract Background Smartwatches are increasingly popular and used for digital health information. A new smart watch introduced an integrated ECG tool, which allows recording a single-lead ECG that has been used for atrial fibrillation detection. The aim of the present study was to prospectively investigate the feasibility and the accuracy of the Apple Watch in patients admitted in the CCU with the diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome compared with a standard 12-lead ECG. Methods A commercially available smart watch series 4 was used and the posterior sensor of the watch was positioned in different standardized body positions to obtain nine bipolar ECGs (corresponding to Einthoven leads I, II and III and Precordial leads V1-V6) that were compared with a simultaneous standard 12-lead ECG. One hundred subjects were included in the study. Fifty-five patients had a STEMI, twenty-seven patients had an NSTEMI all treated with percutaneous coronary revascularization. Eighteen age-matched subjects were included as controls. Results A very good agreement was found between Smartwatch ECG and Standard ECG for the identification of normal ECG, ST segment elevation and NSTE alterations (Cohen's kappa 0.90 [95% CI 0.78 to 1], 0.88 [95% CI 0.78 to 0,97], 0.85 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.96]), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Smartwatch ECG for the diagnosis of normal ECG were 84% (95% CI 60 to 97) and 100% (95% CI 95 to 100), STE deviation were 93% (95% CI 82 to 99) and 95% (95% CI 85 to 99), NSTE ECG alterations were 94% (95% CI 81 to 99) and 92% (95% CI 83 to 97), respectively. No significant differences between Smartwatch ECG and Standard ECG for the amplitude of ST changes were reported for each lead (see Figure). Conclusions The Smart Ami Trial demonstrated a very good agreement between the Smartwatch ECG and Standard ECG for the identification of ST-segment elevation and ST depression in patients with acute coronary syndromes opening the possibility of using this tool when a standard ECG is not available. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Non-specific pain and 30-day readmission in acute coronary syndromes: findings from the TRACE-CORE prospective cohort

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinying Chen ◽  
Catarina I. Kiefe ◽  
Marc Gagnier ◽  
Darleen Lessard ◽  
David McManus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chest Pain ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Moderate Pain ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Patients with acute coronary syndromes often experience non-specific (generic) pain after hospital discharge. However, evidence about the association between post-discharge non-specific pain and rehospitalization remains limited. Methods We analyzed data from the Transitions, Risks, and Actions in Coronary Events Center for Outcomes Research and Education (TRACE-CORE) prospective cohort. TRACE-CORE followed patients with acute coronary syndromes for 24 months post-discharge from the index hospitalization, collected patient-reported generic pain (using SF-36) and chest pain (using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire) and rehospitalization events. We assessed the association between generic pain and 30-day rehospitalization using multivariable logistic regression (N = 787). We also examined the associations among patient-reported pain, pain documentation identified by natural language processing (NLP) from electronic health record (EHR) notes, and the outcome. Results Patients were 62 years old (SD = 11.4), with 5.1% Black or Hispanic individuals and 29.9% women. Within 30 days post-discharge, 87 (11.1%) patients were re-hospitalized. Patient-reported mild-to-moderate pain, without EHR documentation, was associated with 30-day rehospitalization (odds ratio [OR]: 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14–3.62, reference: no pain) after adjusting for baseline characteristics; while patient-reported mild-to-moderate pain with EHR documentation (presumably addressed) was not (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.52–2.90). Severe pain was also associated with 30-day rehospitalization (OR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.32–7.54), even after further adjusting for chest pain (OR: 2.59, 95% CI: 1.06–6.35). Conclusions Patient-reported post-discharge generic pain was positively associated with 30-day rehospitalization. Future studies should further disentangle the impact of cardiac and non-cardiac pain on rehospitalization and develop strategies to support the timely management of post-discharge pain by healthcare providers.

scholarly journals Post-Discharge Bleeding and Mortality Following Acute Coronary Syndromes With or Without PCI

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Marquis-Gravel ◽  
Frederik Dalgaard ◽  
Aaron D. Jones ◽  
Yuliya Lokhnygina ◽  
Stefan K. James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Cardiogenic shock in patients with acute coronary syndromes

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Thiele ◽  
Uwe Zeymer
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Circulatory Support ◽  
Intensive Care Treatment ◽  
Post Discharge ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Syndromes

Cardiogenic shock complicating an acute coronary syndrome is observed in up to 10% of patients and is associated with high mortality still approaching 50%. The extent of ischaemic myocardium has a profound impact on the initial, in-hospital, and post-discharge management and prognosis of the cardiogenic shock patient. Careful risk assessment for each patient, based on clinical criteria, is mandatory, to decide appropriately regarding revascularization by primary percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, drug treatment by inotropes and vasopressors, mechanical left ventricular support, additional intensive care treatment, triage among alternative hospital care levels, and allocation of clinical resources. This chapter will outline the underlying causes and diagnostic criteria, pathophysiology, and treatment of cardiogenic shock complicating acute coronary syndromes, including mechanical complications and shock from right heart failure. There will be a major focus on potential therapeutic issues from an interventional cardiologist’s and an intensive care physician’s perspective on the advancement of new therapeutical arsenals, both mechanical percutaneous circulatory support and pharmacological support. Since studying the cardiogenic shock population in randomized trials remains challenging, this chapter will also touch upon the specific challenges encountered in previous clinical trials and the implications for future perspectives in cardiogenic shock.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document