Evidence-based, cost-effective risk stratification and management after myocardial infarction

Prakash C. Deedwania, Ezra A Amsterdam, Randall H. Vagelos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Current management of patients after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reflects a variety of approaches ranging from conservative to aggressive. Although each method is appropriate in certain subgroups, their application frequently lacks a scientific ba sis. Current, clinically relevant, evidence-based practice guidelines are needed for secondary prevention for survivors after an AMI. To meet this need, the California Cardiology Working Group was assembled to evaluate the available data from clinical trials and other published studies and develop evidence-based, cost- effective guidelines for clinicians to use as a basis for patient management after an AMI. The group consisted of 18 members, including cardiologists from academic institutions and physicians working in cardiac intensive care, private practices, and managed care settings, representing a broad spectrum of expertise pertaining to patients who have had an AMI. The members had expertise in cardiac intensive care, interventional cardiology, nuclear cardiology, lipid disorders, echocardiography, and cardiac rehabilitation. The intended audience for these practice guidelines includes all physicians who treat survivors of MI. A literature review of all relevant clinical trials and other published data about the natural history after AMI and the effects of current therapeutic modalities are discussed herein. Case histories served as models for application of the literature-based data. The recommendations for management were reached by consensus vote based on the scientific evidence. When more than 1 management option applied, this was recognized in the recommendations. The recommendations accompany the text.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)273-280
Number of pages8
JournalArchives of Internal Medicine
Volume157
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Risk Management
Myocardial Infarction
Costs and Cost Analysis
Cardiology
Critical Care
Practice Guidelines
Survivors
Clinical Trials
Physicians
Evidence-Based Practice
Private Practice
Managed Care Programs
Therapeutic Uses
Secondary Prevention
Natural History
Echocardiography
Guidelines
Lipids

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Evidence-based, cost-effective risk stratification and management after myocardial infarction. / Deedwania, Prakash C.; Amsterdam, Ezra A; Vagelos, Randall H.

In: Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 157, No. 3, 1997, p. 273-280.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{418e0190e6b749eab3a4d6492a2dd009,
title = "Evidence-based, cost-effective risk stratification and management after myocardial infarction",
abstract = "Current management of patients after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reflects a variety of approaches ranging from conservative to aggressive. Although each method is appropriate in certain subgroups, their application frequently lacks a scientific ba sis. Current, clinically relevant, evidence-based practice guidelines are needed for secondary prevention for survivors after an AMI. To meet this need, the California Cardiology Working Group was assembled to evaluate the available data from clinical trials and other published studies and develop evidence-based, cost- effective guidelines for clinicians to use as a basis for patient management after an AMI. The group consisted of 18 members, including cardiologists from academic institutions and physicians working in cardiac intensive care, private practices, and managed care settings, representing a broad spectrum of expertise pertaining to patients who have had an AMI. The members had expertise in cardiac intensive care, interventional cardiology, nuclear cardiology, lipid disorders, echocardiography, and cardiac rehabilitation. The intended audience for these practice guidelines includes all physicians who treat survivors of MI. A literature review of all relevant clinical trials and other published data about the natural history after AMI and the effects of current therapeutic modalities are discussed herein. Case histories served as models for application of the literature-based data. The recommendations for management were reached by consensus vote based on the scientific evidence. When more than 1 management option applied, this was recognized in the recommendations. The recommendations accompany the text.",
author = "Deedwania, {Prakash C.} and Amsterdam, {Ezra A} and Vagelos, {Randall H.}",
year = "1997",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "157",
pages = "273--280",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence-based, cost-effective risk stratification and management after myocardial infarction

AU - Deedwania, Prakash C.

AU - Amsterdam, Ezra A

AU - Vagelos, Randall H.

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Current management of patients after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reflects a variety of approaches ranging from conservative to aggressive. Although each method is appropriate in certain subgroups, their application frequently lacks a scientific ba sis. Current, clinically relevant, evidence-based practice guidelines are needed for secondary prevention for survivors after an AMI. To meet this need, the California Cardiology Working Group was assembled to evaluate the available data from clinical trials and other published studies and develop evidence-based, cost- effective guidelines for clinicians to use as a basis for patient management after an AMI. The group consisted of 18 members, including cardiologists from academic institutions and physicians working in cardiac intensive care, private practices, and managed care settings, representing a broad spectrum of expertise pertaining to patients who have had an AMI. The members had expertise in cardiac intensive care, interventional cardiology, nuclear cardiology, lipid disorders, echocardiography, and cardiac rehabilitation. The intended audience for these practice guidelines includes all physicians who treat survivors of MI. A literature review of all relevant clinical trials and other published data about the natural history after AMI and the effects of current therapeutic modalities are discussed herein. Case histories served as models for application of the literature-based data. The recommendations for management were reached by consensus vote based on the scientific evidence. When more than 1 management option applied, this was recognized in the recommendations. The recommendations accompany the text.

AB - Current management of patients after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reflects a variety of approaches ranging from conservative to aggressive. Although each method is appropriate in certain subgroups, their application frequently lacks a scientific ba sis. Current, clinically relevant, evidence-based practice guidelines are needed for secondary prevention for survivors after an AMI. To meet this need, the California Cardiology Working Group was assembled to evaluate the available data from clinical trials and other published studies and develop evidence-based, cost- effective guidelines for clinicians to use as a basis for patient management after an AMI. The group consisted of 18 members, including cardiologists from academic institutions and physicians working in cardiac intensive care, private practices, and managed care settings, representing a broad spectrum of expertise pertaining to patients who have had an AMI. The members had expertise in cardiac intensive care, interventional cardiology, nuclear cardiology, lipid disorders, echocardiography, and cardiac rehabilitation. The intended audience for these practice guidelines includes all physicians who treat survivors of MI. A literature review of all relevant clinical trials and other published data about the natural history after AMI and the effects of current therapeutic modalities are discussed herein. Case histories served as models for application of the literature-based data. The recommendations for management were reached by consensus vote based on the scientific evidence. When more than 1 management option applied, this was recognized in the recommendations. The recommendations accompany the text.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031022773&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031022773&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9040293

AN - SCOPUS:0031022773

VL - 157

SP - 273

EP - 280

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 3

ER -