Comparing secondary prevention for patients with coronary heart disease and stroke attending Australian general practices: a cross-sectional study using nationwide electronic database.
Jason Yue, Samia Kazi, Tu Nguyen, Clara Kayei Chow
{"title":"Comparing secondary prevention for patients with coronary heart disease and stroke attending Australian general practices: a cross-sectional study using nationwide electronic database.","authors":"Jason Yue, Samia Kazi, Tu Nguyen, Clara Kayei Chow","doi":"10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare secondary prevention care for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, exploring particularly the influences due to frequency and regularity of primary care visits.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Secondary prevention for patients (≥18 years) in the National Prescription Service administrative electronic health record database collated from 458 Australian general practice sites across all states and territories.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cross-sectional and panel study. Patient and care-level characteristics were compared for differing CHD/stroke diagnoses. Associations between the type of cardiovascular diagnosis and medication prescription as well as risk factor assessment were examined using multivariable logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Patients with three or more general practice encounters within 2 years of their latest visit during 2016-2020.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Proportions and odds ratios (ORs) for (1) prescription of antihypertensives, antilipidaemics and antiplatelets and (2) assessment of blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with stroke only compared against those with CHD only and those with both conditions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 111 892 patients with CHD only, 27 863 with stroke only and 9791 with both conditions. Relative to patients with CHD, patients with stroke were underprescribed antihypertensives (70.8% vs 82.8%), antilipidaemics (63.1% vs 78.7%) and antiplatelets (42.2% vs 45.7%). With sociodemographic factors, comorbidities and level of care considered as covariates, the odds of non-prescription of any recommended secondary prevention medications were higher in patients with stroke only (adjusted OR 1.37; 95% CI (1.31, 1.44)) compared with patients with CHD only. Patients with stroke only were also more likely to have neither BP nor LDL-C monitored (adjusted OR 1.26; 95% CI (1.18, 1.34)). Frequent and regular general practitioner encounters were independently associated with the prescription of secondary prevention medications (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Secondary prevention management is suboptimal in cardiovascular disease patients and worse post-stroke compared with post-CHD. More frequent and regular primary care encounters were associated with improved secondary prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":9077,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Quality & Safety","volume":" ","pages":"499-510"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Quality & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015699","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To compare secondary prevention care for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, exploring particularly the influences due to frequency and regularity of primary care visits.
Setting: Secondary prevention for patients (≥18 years) in the National Prescription Service administrative electronic health record database collated from 458 Australian general practice sites across all states and territories.
Design: Retrospective cross-sectional and panel study. Patient and care-level characteristics were compared for differing CHD/stroke diagnoses. Associations between the type of cardiovascular diagnosis and medication prescription as well as risk factor assessment were examined using multivariable logistic regression.
Participants: Patients with three or more general practice encounters within 2 years of their latest visit during 2016-2020.
Outcome measures: Proportions and odds ratios (ORs) for (1) prescription of antihypertensives, antilipidaemics and antiplatelets and (2) assessment of blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with stroke only compared against those with CHD only and those with both conditions.
Results: There were 111 892 patients with CHD only, 27 863 with stroke only and 9791 with both conditions. Relative to patients with CHD, patients with stroke were underprescribed antihypertensives (70.8% vs 82.8%), antilipidaemics (63.1% vs 78.7%) and antiplatelets (42.2% vs 45.7%). With sociodemographic factors, comorbidities and level of care considered as covariates, the odds of non-prescription of any recommended secondary prevention medications were higher in patients with stroke only (adjusted OR 1.37; 95% CI (1.31, 1.44)) compared with patients with CHD only. Patients with stroke only were also more likely to have neither BP nor LDL-C monitored (adjusted OR 1.26; 95% CI (1.18, 1.34)). Frequent and regular general practitioner encounters were independently associated with the prescription of secondary prevention medications (p<0.001).
Conclusions: Secondary prevention management is suboptimal in cardiovascular disease patients and worse post-stroke compared with post-CHD. More frequent and regular primary care encounters were associated with improved secondary prevention.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Quality & Safety (previously Quality & Safety in Health Care) is an international peer review publication providing research, opinions, debates and reviews for academics, clinicians and healthcare managers focused on the quality and safety of health care and the science of improvement.
The journal receives approximately 1000 manuscripts a year and has an acceptance rate for original research of 12%. Time from submission to first decision averages 22 days and accepted articles are typically published online within 20 days. Its current impact factor is 3.281.