Key result
Subjective risk underestimation drives EBT underuse in NSTE-ACS, leaving ~77% untreated at 1 year.
Why the study?
ACS patients at highest risk are least likely to receive evidence-based treatments, and reasons for nonprescription and factors affecting use after 1 year are unclear.
What are the reasons for non-prescription and discontinuation of evidence-based treatments in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes?
Comparison
Patients prescribed evidence-based treatments vs patients not prescribed these treatments
Design
Prospective multicenter cohort study
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Loading...
Subjective risk underestimation links to persistent undertreatment in NSTE-ACS; leaves open whether objective tools improve prescription rates.
Cohort (n=1,956)
Yes
What are the reasons for non-prescription and discontinuation of evidence-based treatments in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes?
Subjective underestimation of patient risk leads to significant under-prescription of evidence-based treatments in NSTE-ACS, emphasizing the need for objective risk stratification.
Bagnall et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes (n=1,956). Evidence-based treatments (EBTs) vs. No evidence-based treatments was evaluated on Reasons for not prescribing EBTs and medication use after 1 year. Nonprovision of evidence-based treatments in non-ST-segment-elevation ACS patients was commonly due to subjective underestimation of risk, with 77% remaining untreated at 1 year.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: