INTRODUCTION

This retrospective cohort study investigated the quality of care provided to patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at a non-PCI capable tertiary hospital. We employed validated quality indicators (QIs) endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) to assess adherence to evidence-based guidelines for AMI care.

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective cohort study aims to comprehensively evaluate the quality of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care provided at a non-PCI capable tertiary hospital by utilizing validated quality indicators (QIs). The study assesses adherence to evidence-based guidelines, identifies areas of improvement, and explores the association between care processes and patient outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to a non-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capable tertiary hospital between January 2021 and December 2022. Data on quality indicators were systematically extracted from medical records to assess adherence to clinical guidelines and patient outcomes. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of mortality, while controlling for potential confounders such as demographic and clinical characteristics. Ethical approval was granted, and patient data was anonymized in compliance with national regulations.

RESULTS

The study identified a patient population consistent with established cardiovascular risk factors. Adherence rates to QIs varied across different domains. Notably, the risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rate was 29.09%, highlighting the need for further investigation into factors influencing patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights both strengths and gaps in adherence to AMI quality indicators at a non-PCI hospital. While key treatments such as P2Y12 inhibitor use and anticoagulation were well implemented, areas like reperfusion protocols, LVEF measurement, and data collection require improvement. These findings reinforce the importance of evidence-based practices and the need for targeted quality improvement initiatives to address disparities in care. Future efforts should focus on enhancing data collection and exploring the reasons behind regional variations to optimize outcomes for AMI patients in resource-limited settings.

Risk Assessment