Impact of Transport Method in Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction on Patient Outcomes: Real‐World Data From the ACSIS Registry

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Study population. Study population consisting of patients with STEMI categorized into “early” and “late” periods further divided into mode of transport in each period. ACSIS indicates Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey; BLS, basic life support; ICU, intensive care unit; and STEMI, ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction.

• 

  Figure 2. Trends in mode of transport between the study periods. Blue, overall use of each transport method in the study period for the entire cohort; red, early period; and yellow, late period. BLS indicates basic life support; and ICU, intensive care unit.

• 

  Figure 3. Door‐to‐balloon time (time from hospital arrival to primary PCI), n=3924. Door‐to‐balloon time for each mode of transport, comparison between early (red) and late (green) periods. BLS indicates basic life support; ICU, intensive care unit; and PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

• 

  Figure 4. One‐year mortality rate (crude data) by years and transportation. Crude data 1‐year mortality rates per transport methods. The dots represent the biannual ACSIS survey with respect to early vs late periods. P values for early vs late 1‐year mortality reductions for each transport method are noted. (Please note the plot is not continuous; the lines connecting the dots are for visual aid.) BLS indicates basic life support; and ICU, intensive care unit.

• 

  Figure 5. Kaplan–Meier plot for 1‐year mortality rate. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Hazard ratios for crude and adjusted 1‐year survival were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. BLS indicates basic life support; HR, hazard ratio; and ICU, intensive care unit.