European survey on acute coronary syndrome diagnosis and revascularisation treatment: Assessing differences in reported clinical practice with a focus on strategies for specific patient cases

Anne‐Claire Peultier,Dimitrios Venetsanos,Imran Rashid,Johan L. Severens,William K. Redekop
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13333
2020-01-29
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Abstract:Rationale, Aims, and ObjectivesWhile different imaging and treatment options are available in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care, there is a lack of data regarding their use across Europe. We examined the diagnostic and treatment strategies in patients with known or suspected ACS as reported by physicians and identified variations in responses across European countries and geographical areas. MethodA web‐based clinician survey focusing on ACS imaging and revascularization treatments was circulated through email distribution lists and websites of European professional societies in the field of cardiology. We collected information on respondents' clinical setting and specialty. Reported percentages of patients receiving imaging or treatment modalities and percentages of clinicians reporting to use modalities in a range of clinical scenarios were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were performed. ResultsIn total, 69 responses were received (Sweden [n = 20], United Kingdom [n = 16], Northern/Western Europe [n = 17], Southern Europe [n = 9], and Central Europe [n = 7]). Considerable variations between geographical areas were seen in terms of reported diagnostic modalities and treatment strategies. For example, when presented with the scenario of a theoretical 45‐year‐old smoking female with a suspected ACS, 56% of UK clinicians reported to use coronary computed tomography angiography, compared to only 10% of Swedish clinicians (P = .002). Large variations were observed regarding the reported use of fractional flow reserve by physicians for non‐culprit lesions during invasive management of myocardial infarction patients (44% in Sweden, 31% in the United Kingdom, and 30% in Northern/Western Europe vs non‐use in Central and Southern Europe). ConclusionsIn this survey, respondents reported different diagnostic and treatment strategies in ACS care. These variations seem to have geographic components. Larger studies or real world data are needed to verify these observations and investigate their causes. More research is needed to compare the quality and efficiency of ACS care across countries and explore pathways for improvement.
medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services,medical informatics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the differences in the diagnosis and revascularization treatment strategies of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in different countries and regions in Europe. Specifically, through an online survey, the researchers collected reports from European cardiologists on the diagnosis and treatment strategies for ACS patients, aiming to evaluate the application and differences of these strategies in different geographical regions. The focus of the study lies in the application of diagnostic tests (including coronary artery imaging and functional assessment) and revascularization treatment in various clinical scenarios, especially the strategies for known or suspected ACS patients. The key points of the paper include: - **Research background**: Although there are currently multiple imaging and treatment options available for ACS care, there is a relative lack of data on the use of these methods across Europe. - **Research purpose**: To understand the differences in ACS diagnosis and treatment strategies in different countries and regions through surveys and explore whether these differences are influenced by geographical factors. - **Research method**: Using an online survey method, questionnaires were distributed to professionals in the field of European cardiology to collect information on their choices of diagnosis and treatment strategies in specific clinical cases. - **Research results**: The results show that there are significant geographical differences in the choice of diagnosis and treatment strategies. For example, British doctors are more inclined to use coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA), while Swedish doctors use this method less frequently. In addition, there are also large differences in the strategic choices of doctors in different regions for the treatment of non - culprit lesions. - **Conclusion**: The survey found that there are obvious differences in the diagnosis and treatment strategies of ACS care in different countries and regions, and these differences seem to be related to geographical location. Further research is needed to verify these observations and explore the reasons behind them, in order to compare the quality and efficiency of ACS care in various countries and explore improvement paths. This study emphasizes the importance of understanding and analyzing the differences in ACS care between different countries and regions, which is of great significance for improving the quality of medical services, optimizing resource allocation, and promoting international medical cooperation.