You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 161 No. 2, January 22, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Investigation
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (30)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Lipids and Lipid Disorders
 •Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Use of the Statins in Patients After Acute Myocardial Infarction

Does Evidence Change Practice?

Cynthia A. Jackevicius, BScPhm, MSc; Geoffrey M. Anderson, MD, PhD; Lawrence Leiter, MD; Jack V. Tu, MD, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:183-188.

Objective  To compare the use of lipid-lowering agents in 42 628 elderly patients (aged >=65 years) after acute myocardial infarction, before and after the publication of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S), using the Ontario Myocardial Infarction Database.

Methods  Multivariate regression models were created to estimate changes in the rate of statin use over time in monthly cohorts of elderly patients after acute myocardial infarction in Ontario from April 1, 1992, to March 31, 1997. Changes in the rate of statin use over time were estimated using patient and prescriber characteristics.

Results  We found a 3.6-fold significant increase in the monthly rate of statin use after the publication of 4S compared with before the publication of 4S (P<.001); specifically, the rate of increase in simvastatin and pravastatin sodium use was higher after the publication of 4S (P<.001 for each). Before the publication of 4S, the rate of increase in statin use in younger patients (aged 65-74 years) was 2.7 times higher than in older patients (aged >=75 years) (P = .02), while after the publication of 4S, the rate of increase in statin use was only 1.8-fold higher in the younger group (P<.001). After the publication of 4S, there was a 1.6-fold higher rate of increase in statin use in male compared with female patients (P = .006). Also after the publication of 4S, specialists (cardiologists and internists) had a 2-fold higher rate of increased use of the statins than did generalists (P<.001).

Conclusion  It is possible to shift practice if the evidence of benefit is strong, the intervention is easy to implement, and the intervention is marketed aggressively.


From the Pharmacy Department, University Health Network–Toronto General Hospital (Ms Jackevicius), the Departments of Health Administration (Ms Jackevicius and Drs Anderson and Tu), Medicine (Drs Leiter and Tu), Nutritional Sciences (Dr Leiter), and Public Health Sciences (Dr Tu), University of Toronto, the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Drs Anderson and Tu), St Michael's Hospital (Dr Leiter), and the Division of General Internal Medicine, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Science Centre (Dr Tu), Toronto, Ontario. Dr Leiter has received research funding from and has been a speaker for Merck Canada, Montreal, Quebec, the manufacturer of simvastatin.

Corresponding author and reprints: Cynthia A. Jackevicius, BScPhm, MSc, Pharmacy Department, University Health Network–Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2C4 (e-mail: cynthia.jackevicius{at}uhn.on.ca).


RELATED ARTICLE

Archives of Internal Medicine Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(2):301-302.
FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Primary Nonadherence After Acute Myocardial Infarction
Jackevicius et al.
Circulation 2008;117:1028-1036.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Statins prescribing for the secondary prevention of ischaemic heart disease in Torino, Italy. A case of ageism and social inequalities
Gnavi et al.
Eur J Public Health 2007;17:492-496.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Adherence to Statin Therapy Under Drug Cost Sharing in Patients With and Without Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Population-Based Natural Experiment
Schneeweiss et al.
Circulation 2007;115:2128-2135.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Impact of a scientific presentation on community treatment patterns for primary breast cancer.
Giordano et al.
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:382-388.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Trends in the Prescribing of Antidepressants Following Acute Myocardial Infarction, 1993-2002
Benazon et al.
Psychosom. Med. 2005;67:916-920.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effectiveness of statins for secondary prevention in elderly patients after acute myocardial infarction: an evaluation of class effect
Zhou et al.
CMAJ 2005;172:1187-1194.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

How Rapidly Do Oncologists Respond to Clinical Trial Data?
Buzdar and Macahilig
The Oncologist 2005;10:15-21.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Prescriptions for Estrogen Replacement Therapy in Ontario Before and After Publication of the Women's Health Initiative Study
Austin et al.
JAMA 2003;289:3241-3242.
FULL TEXT  

The striking effect of the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) on ramipril prescribing in Ontario
Tu et al.
CMAJ 2003;168:553-557.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Long-term Persistence in Use of Statin Therapy in Elderly Patients
Benner et al.
JAMA 2002;288:455-461.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Adherence With Statin Therapy in Elderly Patients With and Without Acute Coronary Syndromes
Jackevicius et al.
JAMA 2002;288:462-467.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

European comparison of costs and quality in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (2000-2001)
Gandjour et al.
Eur Heart J 2002;23:858-868.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Disparities in the Diagnosis and Pharmacologic Treatment of High Serum Cholesterol by Race and Ethnicity: Data From the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
Nelson et al.
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:929-935.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.