Fonarow, Gregg C.

Background— Prior studies have demonstrated low use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) as primary prevention, particularly among women and blacks. The degree to which the overall use of ICD therapy and disparities in use have changed is unclear. Methods and Results— We examined 11 880 unique patients with a history of heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% who were ≥65 years old and enrolled in the Get With the Guidelines–Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) program from January 2005 through December 2009. We determined the rate of ICD use by year for the overall population and for sex and race groups. From 2005 to 2007, overall ICD use increased from 30.2% to 42.4% and then remained unchanged in 2008 to 2009. After adjustment for potential confounders, ICD use increased significantly in the overall study population during 2005 to 2007 (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.11–1.48 per year; P =0.0008) and in black women (odds ratio, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–2.58 per year; P =0.0008), white women (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.59 per year; P =0.010), black men (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.19–1.99 per year; P =0.0009), and white men (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.48 per year; P =0.0072). The increase in ICD use was greatest among blacks. Conclusions— In the GWTG-HF quality improvement program, a significant increase in ICD therapy use was observed over time in all sex and race groups. The previously described racial disparities in ICD use were no longer present by the end of the study period; however, sex differences persisted.

The American Heart Association’s (AHA’s) mission is “to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke.” This first article in a 2-part series will serve to present an overview of the work the AHA has undertaken to translate evidence into practice for healthcare professionals. It describes the extensive work of the AHA to support and further the delivery of evidence-based medicine, which includes the following: (1) supporting scientific discovery and the next generation of healthcare professionals and researchers; (2) disseminating scientific information; (3) developing evidence-based guidelines and statements; (4) creating and advocating for the implementation of performance indicators/measures; (5) developing clinical decision support and quality improvement tools; and (6) developing directed-cause campaigns, all of which can lead to improved patient care. This article also discusses the need for novel approaches and some of the AHA’s evolving strategies to help address gaps in care. The second article, which will be published shortly after this one, will examine the AHA’s efforts to engage and empower healthcare consumers to become more involved with their own health and health care.

Background— Prior studies have demonstrated an inconsistent association between patients’ arrival time for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and their subsequent medical care and outcomes. Methods and Results— Using a contemporary national clinical registry, we examined differences in medical care and in-hospital mortality among AMI patients admitted during regular hours (weekdays 7 am to 7 pm ) versus off-hours (weekends, holidays, and 7 pm to 7 am weeknights). The study cohort included 62 814 AMI patients from the Get With the Guidelines–Coronary Artery Disease database admitted to 379 hospitals throughout the United States from July 2000 through September 2005. Overall, 33 982 (54.1%) patients arrived during off-hours. Compared with those arriving during regular hours, eligible off-hour patients were slightly less likely to receive primary percutaneous coronary intervention (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 0.98), had longer door-to-balloon times (median, 110 versus 85 minutes; P <0.0001), and were less likely to achieve door-to-balloon ≤90 minutes (adjusted OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.39). Arrival during off-hours was associated with slightly lower overall revascularization rates (adjusted OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90 to 0.97). No measurable differences, however, were found in in-hospital mortality between regular hours and off-hours in the overall AMI, ST-elevated MI, and non–ST-elevated MI cohorts (adjusted OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.06; adjusted OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.18; and adjusted OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.04, respectively). Similar observations were made across most age and sex subgroups and with an alternative definition for arrival time (weekends/holidays versus weekdays). Conclusions— Despite slightly fewer primary percutaneous coronary interventions and overall revascularizations and significantly longer door-to-balloon times, patients presenting with AMI during off-hours had in-hospital mortality similar to those presenting during regular hours.