Assessment of quality of life and drug prescription pattern in acute coronary syndrome
Nikhilesh Andhi,Prathyusha Desham,C Madavi,S Bhavana,D Naresh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jicc.jicc_50_21
2022-09-14
Journal of Indian College of Cardiology
Abstract:Objectives: To assess the health-related quality of life (QOL) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and predict those patients who may have worsened QOL 6 months later and also observe the prescribing patterns of drugs given in their treatment. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the cardiology department in a tertiary care hospital. The data were collected in both inpatient and outpatient cardiology departments based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria for a period of 6 months. A total of 240 patients were analyzed with a data collection form by interviewing the patients about their sociodemographic details, laboratory parameters, and diagnostic reports. The MacNew Heart Disease Questionnaire, Medical Research Council Breathlessness Scale, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Scale were used for assessing the QOL in patients with ACS. We calculated Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Score and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Score for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients for identifying the mortality risk. Results: Urban people were more prone to ACS than rural people, according to our data. According to the NYHA Functional Classification, ability to do physical activity was more considerably affected in NSTEMI patients than STEMI and angina. Most of the patients had Grade 2 shortness of breath. 35% of the patients had a high mortality risk. Based on the MacNew Questionnaire data, 23% of the patients with ACS were doing emotionally poor, 45% of the patients had shown physically impaired symptoms, 28% of the patients were socially dependent, 8% of the patients showed poor gastric condition. 49% of the patients were given reperfusion therapy with either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft, 25% of the patients were managed with dual-anticoagulant therapy, and 6% of the patients were treated with single-anticoagulant therapy. Commonly prescribed drug classes were statins (90%), antiplatelets (86%), anticoagulants (75%), antianginal (55%), beta-blockers (50%), diuretics (35%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (18%), and angiotensin receptor blockers (16%). Conclusion: QOL was significantly affected in ACS patients. Most of the patients had risk factors for ACS. Patients explained impairments in all the four domains used in the questionnaire such as emotional, physical, social, and gastric impairments. QOL was more affected in STEMI patients and they had a high mortality risk. Most of the patients had NSTEMI. Low-risk patients were given single-anticoagulant therapy and medium-risk patients were treated with dual-anticoagulant therapy. PCI was preferred in almost all the patients.