Quality evaluation and future priorities for delivering acute myocardial infarction care in Sri Lanka
Ranasinghe WG., Beane A., Vithanage TDP., Priyadarshani GDD., Colombage DDE., Ponnamperuma CJ., Karunarathne S., Schultsz C., Dondorp AM., Haniffa R.
<jats:sec><jats:title>Aim</jats:title><jats:p>This study evaluates the quality of care for patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a tertiary hospital in Colombo using the European Society of Cardiology Quality of Care Working Group’s guidelines (2017).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>A recently implemented electronic AMI registry m-Health tool was used for prospective data collection. Each patient was assessed for eligibility for each of the six domains of quality. Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Risk Model for predicted probability of mortality, and scores for risk of bleeding complications (CRUSADE) and severity of heart failure (Killip classification) were calculated as per published guidelines. A composite measure of quality was derived from compliance with the six domains. Patients were followed up via telephone at 30 days following discharge to evaluate outcome and satisfaction. Organisational information was assessed by administrative review and interview.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Between March 2017 and April 2018, 934 patients with AMI presented to the cardiology department. The majority of patients (90.4%) presented with features of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Mean (SD) overall compliance with the composite quality indicator (CQI) was 44% (0.07). Compliance of ≥50% to the CQI was achieved in 9.8% of STEMI patients. The highest compliance was observed for antithrombotics during hospitalisation (79.1%) and continuous measure of patient satisfaction (76.1%). The lowest compliance was for organisational structure and care processes (22.4%).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>This study reports a registry-based continuous evaluation of the quality of AMI care from a low and middle-income country. Priorities for improvement include improved referral, and networking of primary and secondary health facilities with the percutaneous coronary intervention centre.</jats:p></jats:sec>