Completion of registration of risk factor variables during telephone vs on-site follow-up after myocardial infarction: a nationwide observational study in 101 199 patients from contemporary clinical practice in Sweden

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the completeness of registration of secondary preventive variables comparing on-site visits with telephone consultations during follow-up after myocardial infarction. DESIGN: This was an observational study based on the Swedish quality registry SWEDEHEART. SETTING AND OUTCOME MEASURES: tests were used to compare differences in data registration comparing on-site visits with telephone consultations. Patient characteristics and time trends in the proportion of missing values were also analysed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics for patients with on-site visits and telephone consultations were similar. At the 2-month follow-up, the proportion of missing data registered at on-site visits compared with telephone consultations was systolic blood pressure 2.4% (n=1729) vs 28.0% (n=5462), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 9.1% (n=6525) vs 32.6% (n=6360), weight 20.1% (n=14 343) vs 43.0% (n=8401) and haemoglobin A1c for patients with diabetes mellitus 39.4% (n=4594) vs 69.4% (n=2225), p for all <0.0001. The differences were similar at the 1-year follow-up. Self-reported measures such as smoking status, level of physical activity and current medication had a low proportion of missing data (≤2.1%) for both follow-up modalities. CONCLUSION: Registration of secondary preventive variables was less complete at telephone consultations compared with on-site cardiac rehabilitation follow-up visits, which might indicate lower quality of care during telephone follow-up. Further analysis on the possible impact of lack of registration of secondary preventive variables on patient outcomes is warranted.