Key result
LILAC heart initiative increases Lp(a) testing to ~80% in AMI admissions.
Why the study?
Integration of lipoprotein(a) testing and management into inpatient cardiology care lacked structured implementation and evaluation at 2 years.
Does the LILAC heart initiative improve lipoprotein(a) testing rates and downstream lipid management in inpatient cardiology care?
Observational (n=3,191)
Does the LILAC heart initiative improve lipoprotein(a) testing rates and downstream lipid management in inpatient cardiology care?
Absolute Event Rate: 80.4% vs 6.6%
A multipronged implementation strategy successfully integrated lipoprotein(a) testing into inpatient cardiology care, significantly increasing testing rates and improving downstream lipid management.
May facilitate Lp(a) integration in inpatient cardiology; leaves open effects on outcomes and broader adoption.
BACKGROUND: The LILAC heart is a novel implementation initiative that employs multipronged strategies with the LILAC-for-lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] clinical approach to integrate Lp(a) testing and management into inpatient cardiology care. OBJECTIVE: At 2 years after implementation, we assessed the implementation outcomes. METHODS: Reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) were used to evaluate the initiative's adoption and effectiveness. Small tests of change using 3 plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles conducted between November 2023 and November 2025 were reviewed. RESULTS: Following implementation of LILAC Heart, the mean monthly testing rate increased from 6.6% to 80.4% in the acute myocardial infarction (AMI) pathway and from <0.01% to 45.6% in non-AMI admissions, with a total of 3191 patients tested (reach, effectiveness, and adoption). The overall detection rate of elevated Lp(a) ≥120 nmol/L was 16.2%, and Lp(a) ≥200 nmol/L was 7.0% (effectiveness). The referral rate to the lipid clinic was 53.7%, while 55.4% attended (adoption). The lipid clinic attender group, when compared with the nonattender group (n = 125 vs 158), had higher diagnosis codification rates for elevated Lp(a), higher prescription rates of lipid-lowering agents, and improved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and LDL-C goal attainment rates; all P < .05 (adoption, implementation, and effectiveness). Concomitant with the protocolization of the LILAC-for-Lp(a), multiple extensive collaborative education, training, and awareness efforts, PDSA cycle reviews, and the identification of champions were undertaken to address key barriers and promote sustainability (implementation and maintenance). CONCLUSION: Reasons for the successful integration of Lp(a) into inpatient cardiology at 2 years after implementation included the LILAC clinical framework, accompanied by multipronged collaborative strategies undertaken by the multidisciplinary lipid and cardiology teams.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Loh et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Inpatient cardiology admissions (n=3,191). LILAC heart initiative vs. Pre-implementation was evaluated on Mean monthly Lp(a) testing rate in the acute myocardial infarction (AMI) pathway. Implementation of the LILAC heart initiative increased the mean monthly Lp(a) testing rate from 6.6% to 80.4% in AMI admissions and from <0.01% to 45.6% in non-AMI admissions.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: