Achieving better in-hospital and after-hospital care of patients with acute cardiac disease

In patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and congestive heart failure (CHF), evidence suggests opportunities for improving in-hospital and after hospital care, patient self-care, and hospital-community integration. A multidisciplinary quality improvement program was designed and instigated in Brisbane in October 2000 involving 250 clinicians at three teaching hospitals, 1080 general practitioners (GPs) from five Divisions of General Practice, 1594 patients with ACS and 904 patients with CHF. Quality improvement interventions were implemented over 17 months after a 6-month baseline period and included: clinical decision support (clinical practice guidelines, reminders, checklists, clinical pathways); educational interventions (seminars, academic detailing); regular performance feedback; patient self-management strategies; and hospital-community integration (discharge referral summaries; community pharmacist liaison; patient prompts to attend GPs). Using a before-after study design to assess program impact, significantly more program patients compared with historical controls received: ACS: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and lipid-lowering agents at discharge, aspirin and beta-blockers at 3 months after discharge, inpatient cardiac counselling, and referral to outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. CHF. Assessment for reversible precipitants, use of prophylaxis for deep-venous thrombosis, beta-blockers at discharge, ACE inhibitors at 6 months after discharge, imaging of left ventricular function, and optimal management of blood pressure levels. Risk-adjusted mortality rates at 6 and 12 months decreased, respectively, from 9.8% to 7.4% (P=0.06) and from 13.4% to 10.1% (P= 0.06) for patients with ACS and from 22.8% to 15.2% (P < 0.001) and from 32.8% to 22.4% (P= 0.005) for patients with CHF. Quality improvement programs that feature multifaceted interventions across the continuum of care can change clinical culture, optimise care and improve clinical outcomes.

Distribution of major health risks: findings from the global burden of disease study

Background Most analyses of risks to health focus on the total burden of their aggregate effects. The distribution of risk-factor-attributable disease burden, for example by age or exposure level, can inform the selection and targeting of specific interventions and programs, and increase cost-effectiveness. Methods and Findings For 26 selected risk factors, expert working groups conducted comprehensive reviews of data on risk-factor exposure and hazard for 14 epidemiological subregions of the world, by age and sex. Age-sex-subregion-population attributable fractions were estimated and applied to the mortality and burden of disease estimates from the World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease database. Where possible, exposure levels were assessed as continuous measures, or as multiple categories. The proportion of risk-factor-attributable burden in different population subgroups, defined by age, sex, and exposure level, was estimated. For major cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, cholesterol, tobacco use, fruit and vegetable intake, body mass index, and physical inactivity) 43%-61% of attributable disease burden occurred between the ages of 15 and 59 y, and 87% of alcohol-attributable burden occurred in this age group. Most of the disease burden for continuous risks occurred in those with only moderately raised levels, not among those with levels above commonly used cut-points, such as those with hypertension or obesity. Of all disease burden attributable to being underweight during childhood, 55% occurred among children 1-3 standard deviations below the reference population median, and the remainder occurred among severely malnourished children, who were three or more standard deviations below median. Conclusions Many major global risks are widely spread in a population, rather than restricted to a minority. Population-based strategies that seek to shift the whole distribution of risk factors often have the potential to produce substantial reductions in disease burden.

Left ventricular mass in patients with type 2 diabetes is independently associated with central but not peripheral pulse pressure

An increase in left ventricular mass (LVM) occurs in the presence of type 2 diabetes, apparently independent of hypertension (1), but the determinants of this process are unknown. Brachial blood pressure is not representative of that at the ascending aorta (2) because the pressure wave is amplified from central to peripheral arteries. Central blood pressure is probably more clinically important since local pulsatile pressure determines adverse arterial and myocardial remodeling (3,4). Thus, an inaccurate assessment of the contribution of arterial blood pressure to LVM may occur if only brachial blood pressure is taken into consideration. In this study we sought the contribution of central blood pressure (and other interactive factors known to affect wave reflection, e.g., glycemic control and total arterial compliance) to LVM in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Pressure support ventilation with the ProSeal (R) laryngeal mask airway. A comparison of sevoflurane, isoflurane and propofol

Background and objective: There are no data about the influence of anaesthetics on cardiovascular variables during pressure support ventilation of the lungs through the laryngeal mask airway. We compared propofol, sevoflurane and isoflurane for maintenance of anaesthesia with the ProSeal (R) laryngeal mask airway during pressure support ventilation. Methods: Sixty healthy adults undergoing peripheral musculo-skeletal surgery were randomized for maintenance with sevoflurane end-tidal 29%, isoflurane end-tidal 1.1% or propofol 6 mg kg(-1) h(-1) in oxygen 33% and air. Pressure support ventilation comprised positive end-expiratory pressure set at 5 cmH(2)O, and pressure support set 5 cmH(2)O above positive end-expiratory pressure. Pressure support was initiated when inspiration produced a 2 cmH(2)O reduction in airway pressure. A blinded observer recorded cardiorespiratory variables (heart rate, mean blood pressure, oxygen saturation, air-way occlusion pressure, respiratory rate, expired tidal volume, expired minute volume and end-tidal CO2), adverse events and emergence times. Results: Respiratory rate and minute volume were 10-21% lower, and end-tidal CO2 6-11% higher with the propofol group compared with the sevoflurane or isoflurane groups, but otherwise cardiorespiratory variables were similar among groups. No adverse events occurred in any group. Emergence times were longer with the propofol group compared with the sevoflurane or isoflurane groups (10 vs. 7 vs. 7 min). Conclusion: Lung ventilation is less effective and emergence times are longer with propofol than sevoflurane or isoflurane for maintenance of anaesthesia during pressure support ventilation with the ProSeal (R) laryngeal mask airway. However, these differences are small and of doubtful clinical importance.