Application of a risk-guided strategy to secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: analysis from a state-wide data linkage in Queensland, Australia

OBJECTIVE: This study sought whether higher risk patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) benefit more from intensive disease management. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: State-wide public hospitals (Queensland, Australia). PARTICIPANTS: This longitudinal study included 20 426 patients hospitalised in 2010 with CHD as the principal diagnosis. Patients were followed-up for 5 years. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was days alive and out of hospital (DAOH) within 5 years of hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included all-cause readmission and all-cause mortality. A previously developed and validated risk score (PEGASUS-TIMI54) was used to estimate the risk of secondary events. Data on sociodemography, comorbidity, interventions and medications were also collected. RESULTS: High-risk patients (n=6573, risk score ≥6) had fewer DAOH (∆=−142 days (95% CI: −152 to –131)), and were more likely to readmit or die (all p<0.001) than their low-risk counterparts (n=13 367, risk score <6). Compared with patients who were never prescribed a medication, those who consumed maximal dose of betablockers (∆=39 days (95% CI: 11 to 67)), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (∆=74 days (95% CI: 49 to 99)) or statins (∆=109 days (95% CI: 90 to 128)) had significantly greater DAOH. Patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention (∆=99 days (95% CI: 81 to 116)) or coronary artery bypass grafting (∆=120 days (95% CI: 92 to 148)) also had significantly greater DAOH than those who did not. The effect sizes of these therapies were significantly greater in high-risk patients, compared with low-risk patients (interaction p<0.001). Analysis of secondary outcomes also found significant interaction between both medical and interventional therapies with readmission and death, implicating greater benefits for high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: CHD patients can be effectively risk-stratified, and use of this information for a risk-guided strategy to prioritise high-risk patients may maximise benefits from additional resources spent on intensive disease management.