Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 43759

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionKey MessageAcknowledgementReferences
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2010 | Month : February | Volume : 4 | Issue : 1 | Page : 2041 - 2046 Full Version

A Descriptive Study of the Influence of Age and Gender on Drug Utilization in Acute Myocardial Infarction


Published: February 1, 2010 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2010/.631
KAMATH A* , SHANBHAG T**, SHENOY S***

*MD,AssistantProfessor,**MD,Additional Professor, ***MD,Associate ProfessorDepartment of Pharmacology,Kasturba medical college,Manipal University, (India)

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Ashwin Kamath,Assistant Professor,
Department of Pharmacology,Kasturba medical college, Lighthouse hill road Mangalore - 575001, Karnataka, (INDIA). Tel: +919844262808,Email address: mailmaka@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Despite the presence of effective guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction, there is underuse of thrombolytics, antiplatelet drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta blockers and hypolipidaemics. Gender and age based differences have been reported. Our aim was to determine the percentage of patients who were receiving these drugs during hospital admission and discharge.
Method: A case record study of 349 patients who were admitted to our hospital with a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction during the year 2004-2006, was done. The age, gender, drugs prescribed during the three days following admission and on discharge, co-morbidities, outcome and duration of stay, was noted for each patient.
Results: Of the 349 patients, 81% were males and 19% were females. The average ages of presentation were 57.98 years in men and 65.02 years in women. The percentages of patients who received antiplatelet agents, thrombolytics, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, hypolipidaemics and anticoagulants on hospital admission were 95, 42, 43, 46, 79, 85%,respectively. The prescription rate of antiplatelet agents, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, hypolipidaemics on discharge was 98, 66, 68, 92% respectively.
Conclusions: Our study showed that the initiation of treatment in both the gender and age groups varied. However, the use of drugs among the various groups was almost equal on discharge, except for hypolipidaemics. A majority of the females and elderly patients received all the drugs on hospital discharge, reflecting a lack of gender or age disparity. Although the use of thrombolytics, beta blockers and ACE inhibitors was low on admission, proper use after adjusting for confounding factors might be higher.

Keywords

Myocardial infarction, drug utilization, age, gender

Introduction
Acute myocardial infarction (MI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among all the socioeconomic strata of Indian population (1). The guidelines for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction attempts to define practices that meet the needs of most people in most circumstances. The guidelines serve as a bridge to convert the science of evidence based medicine into clinical practice. However, the uptake of these guidelines has not been uniform. Studies from various parts of the world report that there is still a noteworthy underuse of reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction, as well as a deficit in the prescription of statins, antiplatelet drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (2) or beta blockers (3). Gender based differences have been reported with underutilisation of drugs in females (4). Also, studies have shown a lack of adherence to therapeutic guidelines in the treatment of elderly patients (5). The aim of our study was to determine the percentage of patients with acute myocardial infarction who received the above mentioned drugs during hospital admission and on discharge, with variations with regards to age and gender.

Material and Methods

A retrospective, case-record based descriptive study was carried out in a tertiary care hospital in South India after obtaining approval from the institutional ethics committee. The case record files of all patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction under the categories I21.0 and I21.1 of the International classification of diseases, 10th revision (World Health Organization, 2007), during the year 2004-2006, were retrieved from the medical records department. The following information was collected from the patient files- age, gender, drugs prescribed during the first 3 days of hospital admission and on discharge, co-morbidities, duration of hospital stay and outcome. All patients who were referred from other hospitals to our centre within 10 days of the episode were also included in the study. Information on the utilization of the following drugs on hospital admission and discharge were collected – oral antiplatelet agents, thrombolytics, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), lipid lowering drugs and anticoagulants (heparin and low molecular weight heparin only). Statistical analysis was performed using the Graphpad software for windows. The categorical variables were compared using the chi square test. A probability value of <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

The case record files of 349 patients who were admitted with acute MI during the years 2004 to 2006 were studied. 282 (81%) patients were males and 67 (19%) were females. Patients who were more than 65 years of age formed 40% (138) of the total cases, of which 98 (71%) were males and 40 (29%) were females. The mean age of presentation was 57.98 years in men and 65.02 years in women.

The overall mortality was 22.64% (79). The mortality was 21.63% (61/282) in males, 26.87% (18/67) in females and 34.78% (48/138) in elderly patients. Of the 270 patients at discharge, 221 (82%) were males and 90 (33%)patients were more than 65 years of age.

Use of Drugs in the Entire Study Sample
The percentage of patients who recieved antiplatelet agents, thrombolytics, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, ARBs, hypolipidaemics and anticoagulants on hospital admission was 95.13, 42.41, 42.98, 44.69, 1.43, 79.08, 84.81 percent, respectively. The prescription rate of antiplatelet agents, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, ARBs and hypolipidaemics on discharge was 98.15, 66.30, 65.19, 3.33, 91.85 percent, respectively. 90% of the patients received dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin with clopidogrel).


Use of Drugs According To Gender and Age
The gender and age-wise use of various classes of drugs on admission and discharge are shown in (Table/Fig 1) and (Table/Fig 2), respectively.

The year wise change in the trend of drug prescription on hospital admission in the total sample, females and elderly patients, is shown in (Table/Fig 3). The percentage of patients who received beta blockers and ACE inhibitors on hospital admission and discharge has been compared in (Table/Fig 4), depicting both the gender and age groups.

Prevalence of Co-Morbidities
Out of the 349 patients admitted, 45.56% had diabetes mellitus, 44.13% had hypertension, 40.40% had left ventricular dysfunction ( left ventricular ejection fraction < 40%) or cardiogenic shock and 31.23% had dyslipidaemia.

Duration of Hospital Stay
The average duration of hospitalization was 8.05 days.

Discussion

Our results indicate that a majority of the patients who were admitted with acute MI during the period from 2004-2006 were males (81%). This is similar to the gender distribution seen in other similar studies (83.8%, 85%).(6,7) Patients who were more than 65 years of age formed 40% of the total cases, which is higher than the age distribution seen in the study by Jose and Gupta (33.33%) (6). The overallmortality was 22.64%, which was higher than that reported by Jose and Gupta (16.9%).

The average age of presentation was 57.98 years in men and 65.02 years in women, which was higher than that reported in the study by Joshi et al (51 and 57.3 years, respectively), whose study aimed at assessing the risk factors for early myocardial infarction in south Indians (7). An Indian multicentre study that analyzed data from 4081 subjects, reported that acute coronary syndromes occurred at a mean age of 56.6+12 years in men and 61.8+10 years in women (8).

The average duration of hospitalization was 8.05 days. Although more, as compared to the study by Jose and Gupta, in the European Network for Acute Coronary Treatment (ENACT) study which provided pan-European reference data on acute coronary syndromes, the total hospital stay for acute myocardial infarction varied from 7.9 days in UK/Ireland to 12.6 days in Eastern Europe (9).

Most of the patients received dual antiplatelet medication with aspirin and clopidogrel (90%). The association of physicians of India recommends that all patients with MI, including those with ST segement elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), should receive dual antiplatelet therapy (10). The use of thrombolytics in our study was lower (42%) than that reported in the Clinical Trial of Reviparin and the Metabolic Modulation in the Acute Myocardial Infarction Treatment Evaluation (CREATE) registry, where the use of thrombolytics in tertiary care hospitals was 59.1%.(8). In the study by Cohen M et al., the use of reperfusion therapy among 2741 STEMI patients from various geographic regions varied from 34.5% to 53.8%.(11) In the study by Schiele et al., the use of thrombolytics and beta blockers was 33.33 and 39%, respectively (2). The prescription rate of antiplatelet agents, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors/ARBs and hypolipidaemics on discharge was higher than those in the CREATE registry (98, 66, 68, 92 versus 97, 60, 52, 44, respectively).

With respect to gender differences, a major disparity is seen in the use of thrombolytics which were more commonly administered in males as compared to females (45.74% vs 28.36%, p=0.0096). The prescription rate of other drugs did not differ to a large extent. Although a treatment bias based on gender has been reported in many studies, others have attributed it to differences in clinical presentation, eligibility status or possible gender differences in the side effects which were associated with different therapies (12). At discharge, a larger percentage of female patients received beta blockers as compared to males (73.47% Vs 64.71%), but hypolipidaemics were significantly less commonly prescribed (83.67% Vs 93.67%, p=0.0207). Underutilisation of statins has been documented in women. In the Heart and Oestrogen/Progestin replacement study, only half of those who met the NCEP II criteria for lipid-lowering therapy used statins or other lipid-lowering treatments (13)

With respect to age, a lesser percentage of elderly patients received thrombolytics (33.33 vs 48.34%, p=0.0055), beta blockers (31.16 vs 50.71%, p=0.0003), ACE inhibitors/ARBs (37.68 vs 52.13%, p=0.0081) and hypolipidaemics (73.19 vs 82.94%, p=0.0285) on admission as compared to the younger patients. In a study on patients with acute MI, the use of thrombolytics and beta blockers among the elderly (>60 years) were 35.8% and 7.8%, respectively (14). On discharge, more than 60% of the elderly patients received beta blockers and ACE inhibitors, while more than 80% received antiplatelet drugs and hypolipidaemics, although the use of hypolipidaemics was still significantly less (85.56 vs 95%, p=0.0075). Although the underutilisation of drugs in elderly patients has been documented, adjusting for the various confounding factors might reveal a higher drug use, as shown in the study by George et al.(15)

The year-wise trend in the prescription pattern showed that most of the patients who were admitted with acute MI during the 3 year period, received antiplatelet agents. Also, most of the patients received anticoagulants, averaging above 80% during the 3 year period. A marked increase was seen in the use of hypolipidaemics, especially in elderly patients. More than 90% of the patients received hypolipidaemics in the year 2006. A less prominent, but definite increase was also seen in the prescription of ACE inhibitors. A decrease in the use of beta blockers was seen in the year 2005 in the total sample, as well as in females and elderly patients. The lower use of beta blockers can be partly explained by the presence of left ventricular dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) or cardiogenic shock on presentation to the hospital (44.44, 63.4, 59.6% during the years 2004, 2005, 2006 respectively – data not shown in results). Guidelines recommend the initiation of beta blocker therapy once the patient’s clinical condition has remained stable for at least 24-48 hours (10). More than 60% of the patients received beta blockers on discharge, which might be due to initiation of the drug therapy following stabilization of the cardiovascular status. A consistent decrease in the use of thrombolytics was seen among all the groups. This may be due to the increasing use of percutaneous coronary intervention. Also, ours being a tertiary hospital, many patients were referred from other centers. So, the number of patients presenting after the time period for thrombolysis were high.

The year-wise prescription pattern in females was similar to the total sample. However, the use of thrombolytics, beta blockers and ACE inhibitors was found to be lesser during the year 2004. A similar pattern was also seen in the elderly group. However, all the groups received beta blockers and ACE inhibitors to almost the same extent on discharge.

The limitation of our study was, that it was a single center study with limited sample size. Also, we did not look for the presence of contraindications to drug treatment. However, similar studies done at multiple centers providing various levels of health care will more clearly reflect the use of evidence based treatment for MI in the general population. Particularly, in the future, widespread use of prescription databases and disease registries will serve as powerful tools to evaluate different therapeutic strategies and improve the quality of patient care.

Conclusion

Our study showed that the initiation of treatment in both the genders and the various age groups varied. However, the use of drugs among the various groups was almost equal on discharge, except for hypolipidaemics. The difference in the use of drugs on hospital admission might be due to the varied clinical presentation, the differing prevalence of comorbidities or the time taken to present to the hospital following the acute episode. A majority of the females and the elderly patients received all the drugs on hospital discharge, thus reflecting the effective implementation of the treatment guidelines. Despite the presence of a statistically significant underuse, most of the women and elderly did receive hypolipidaemics. Although the use of thrombolytics, beta blockers and ACE inhibitors was low on admission, proper use after adjusting for the various confounding factors might be higher.

Key Message

1. Previous studies have shown the underutilization of evidence based therapies in females and elderly patients with myocardial infarction.
2. In our study, there was underutilization of thrombolytics in females and elderly patients.
3. Adjustment for confounding factors is necessary to determine the presence of true underutilization of drugs.

Acknowledgement

None

References

1.
Gupta R. Burden of Coronary Heart Disease in India. Indian Heart J. 2005; 57: 632-638.
2.
Schiele F, Meneveau N, Seronde MF, Caulfield F, Fouche R, Lassabe G, et al. Compliance with guidelines and 1-year mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 873-880.
3.
Gislason GH, Rasmussen JN, Abildstrom SZ, Gadsboll N, Buch P, Friberg J, et al. Long-term compliance with beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins after acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1153-1158.
4.
Mak KH, Kark JD, Chia KS, Sim LL, Foong BH, Ding ZP et al.Ethnic variations in female vulnerability after an acute coronary event.Heart 2004; 90 (6): 621-6.
5.
Krumholz HM, Radford MJ, Ellerbeck EF, Hennen J, Meehan TP, Petrillo M, et al. Aspirin for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: prescribed use and outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 1996; 124 (3): 292-8.
6.
Jose JV, Gupta SN. Mortality and morbidity of acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction in the current era. Indian Heart J. 2004; 56:210-14.
7.
Joshi P, Islam S, Pais P, Reddy S, Dorairaj P, Kazmi K, et al. Risk Factors for Early Myocardial Infarction in South Asians Compared With Individuals in Other Countries. JAMA. 2007; 297 (3): 286-94.
8.
Pais P, Xavire D, Gupta R, et al. Treatment and outcome of acute coronary syndromes: Does the hospital make a difference? CREATE registry. Indian Heart J. 2002; 54 (5): 477.
9.
Fox KAA, Cokkinos DV, Deckers J, Keil U, Maggioni A, Steg G. The ENACT study: A pan-European survey of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2000; 21: 1440-49.
10.
Association of physicians of India. API expert consensus document on management of ischemic heart disease. J Assoc Physicians India 2006; 54: 469-80.
11.
Cohen M, Gensini GF, Maritz F, Gurfinkel EP, Huber K, Timerman A, et al. The Role of Gender and Other Factors as Predictors of Not Receiving Reperfusion Therapy and of Outcome in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2005; 19 (3): 155-61.
12.
Harrold LR, Lessard D, Yarzebski J, Gurwitz JH, Gore JM, Goldberg RJ. Age and sex differences in the treatment of patients with initial acute myocardial infarction: a community-wide perspective. Cardiology. 2003; 99 (1): 39-46.
13.
Vittinghoff E, Shlipak MG, Varosy PD. Risk factors and secondary prevention in women with heart disease: the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138 (2): 81-9.
14.
Holay MP, Janbandhu A, Javahirani A, Pandharipande MS, Suryawanshi SD. Clinical profile of acute myocardial infarction in elderly (prospective study). J Assoc Physicians India. 2007; 55: 188-92.
15.
George E, Hunsberger S, Savitha D, Pais P. Treatment of acute myocardial infarction: does the type of hospital make a difference? PPAMI Study Group. Indian Heart J. 1999; 51 (2): 161-6.

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com