Key result
In patients with acute coronary syndrome, initial prescription rates of evidence-based therapies were high but decreased significantly by six months, with less than half of STEMI patients receiving timely reperfusion.
Why the study?
Does the prescription of evidence-based interventions improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Observational (n=2,453)
Yes
Does the prescription of evidence-based interventions improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Despite high initial prescription rates of evidence-based therapies for acute coronary syndrome in Brazil, adherence drops significantly by 6 months, highlighting a gap between guideline recommendations and long-term clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adherence to evidence-based ACS therapies drops sharply by 6 months in Brazil; leaves open whether targeted interventions improve long-term outcomes.
Wang et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Acute Coronary Syndrome (n=2,453). Evidence-based cardiovascular medications was evaluated on Prescription rates of evidence-based treatments (ASA, p2y12 inhibitors, antithrombotic drugs, beta-blockers, ACEI/AT1RB, and statins) at 24 hours and 6 months. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, initial prescription rates of evidence-based therapies were high but decreased significantly by six months, with less than half of STEMI patients receiving timely reperfusion.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: