mja.com.au | The Medical Journal of Australia

Home | Issues | MJA shop | MJA Careers | Contact | Topics | Search | RSS  | Login | Buy full access

Letters

Discordance between level of risk and intensity of evidence-based treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes

V Michael Jelinek
MJA 2007; 187 (8): 479

To the Editor: Scott and colleagues have shown that Australia is no different to the rest of the world in applying evidence-based treatment predominantly to patients at lower risk.1 They suggest that therapy may be withheld from high-risk patients because of over-estimation of the risk of treatment, under-estimation of the actual absolute risk of non-treatment, and consideration of cost-effectiveness and social inequalities.

I suggest that their data support the concept that the patient at highest risk who misses out on evidence-based treatment may in fact be being managed with kindness and wisdom. Such a patient is old, has comorbidities, can be frail, and may be taking 10 pills or more per day, so questions of optimal prognostic therapy must be balanced against quality-of-life factors.

There is abundant evidence that patients at highest risk do not receive the maximum amount of therapy. I suspect the kindness and wisdom factor is underestimated in clinical decision making. What we need now is some good qualitative data — market research — to help explain this phenomenon before we intensify the evidence-based mantra.

V Michael Jelinek, Director of Cardiology

St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, VIC.

michael.jelinekATsvhm.org.au

  1. Scott IA, Derhy PH, O’Kane D, et al. Discordance between level of risk and intensity of evidence-based treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Med J Aust 2007; 187:153-159. <eMJA full text>

(Received 13 Aug 2007, accepted 31 Aug 2007)

Ian A Scott

In reply: Jelinek rightly draws attention to the need, when caring for patients with acute coronary syndromes, to distinguish disease-related risk from age-related risk arising from frailty, comorbidity, physical disability, cognitive impairment, depression, social isolation, age–treatment interactions, and quality of life. All these factors affect treatment goals in older patients and may, as we conceded, justify withholding certain treatments in individual cases. However, even after accounting for “wise compassion”, under-treatment is still likely because:

Given that a third of patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes are aged 75 years or older, for whom 30-day risk of death or myocardial infarction exceeds 20% and who account for 60% of all deaths related to myocardial infarction,4 we recommend, similar to expert bodies,4,5 judicious (not mantra-driven) use of evidence-based treatments in all eligible older patients.

Ian A Scott, Director

Department of Internal Medicine, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD.

ian_scottAThealth.qld.gov.au

  1. Alter DA, Manuel DG, Gunraj N, et al. Age, risk–benefit trade-offs, and the projected effects of evidence-based therapies. Am J Med 2004; 116: 540-545.
  2. Alexander KP, Peterson ED. Treatment of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome in the elderly: current practice and future opportunities. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 2006; 15: 42-49. <PubMed>
  3. Bach RG, Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, et al. The effect of routine, early invasive management on outcome for elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 186-195. <PubMed>
  4. Alexander KP, Newby LK, Cannon CP, et al. Acute coronary care in the elderly, part I: Non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of Geriatric Cardiology. Circulation 2007; 115: 2549-2569. <PubMed>
  5. Alexander KP, Newby LK, Armstrong PW, et al. Acute coronary care in the elderly, part II: ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of Geriatric Cardiology. Circulation 2007; 115: 2570-2589. <PubMed>

(Received 22 Aug 2007, accepted 30 Aug 2007)


Home | Issues | MJA shop | Terms of use | MJA Careers | More... | Contact | Topics | Search | RSS 

mja.com.au | The Medical Journal of Australia  

©The Medical Journal of Australia 2007 www.mja.com.au PRINT ISSN: 0025-729X ONLINE ISSN: 1326-5377