Association of National Initiatives to Improve Cardiac Arrest Management With Rates of Bystander Intervention and Patient Survival After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestIMPORTANCE: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a major health problem associated with poor outcomes. Early recognition and intervention are critical for patient survival. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is one factor among many associated with improved survival. OBJECTIVE: To examine temporal changes in bystander resuscitation attempts and survival during a 10-year period in which several national initiatives were taken to increase rates of bystander resuscitation and improve advanced care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest for which resuscitation was attempted were identified between 2001 and 2010 in the nationwide Danish Cardiac Arrest Registry. Of 29,111 patients with cardiac arrest, we excluded those with presumed noncardiac cause of arrest (n = 7390) and those with cardiac arrests witnessed by emergency medical services personnel (n = 2253), leaving a study population of 19,468 patients. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Temporal trends in bystander CPR, bystander defibrillation, 30-day survival, and 1-year survival. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 72 years; 67.4% were men. Bystander CPR increased significantly during the study period, from 21.1% (95% CI, 18.8%-23.4%) in 2001 to 44.9% (95% CI, 42.6%-47.1%) in 2010 (P < .001), whereas use of defibrillation by bystanders remained low (1.1% [95% CI, 0.6%-1.9%] in 2001 to 2.2% [95% CI, 1.5%-2.9%] in 2010; P = .003). More patients achieved survival on hospital arrival (7.9% [95% CI, 6.4%-9.5%] in 2001 to 21.8% [95% CI, 19.8%-23.8%] in 2010; P < .001). Also, 30-day survival improved (3.5% [95% CI, 2.5%-4.5%] in 2001 to 10.8% [95% CI, 9.4%-12.2%] in 2010; P < .001), as did 1-year survival (2.9% [95% CI, 2.0%-3.9%] in 2001 to 10.2% [95% CI, 8.9%-11.6%] in 2010; P < .001). Despite a decrease in the incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during the study period (40.4 to 34.4 per 100,000 persons in 2001 and 2010, respectively; P = .002), the number of survivors per 100,000 persons increased significantly (P < .001). For the entire study period, bystander CPR was positively associated with 30-day survival, regardless of witnessed status (30-day survival for nonwitnessed cardiac arrest, 4.3% [95% CI, 3.4%-5.2%] with bystander CPR and 1.0% [95% CI, 0.8%-1.3%] without; odds ratio, 4.38 [95% CI, 3.17-6.06]). For witnessed arrest the corresponding values were 19.4% (95% CI, 18.1%-20.7%) vs 6.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-6.7%); odds ratio, 3.74 (95% CI, 3.26-4.28). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In Denmark between 2001 and 2010, an increase in survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was significantly associated with a concomitant increase in bystander CPR. Because of the co-occurrence of other related initiatives, a causal relationship remains uncertain.
Risk of Bleeding With Single, Dual, or Triple Therapy With Warfarin, Aspirin, and Clopidogrel in Patients With Atrial FibrillationBACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require anticoagulation and platelet inhibition, but data are limited on the bleeding risk of combination therapy. METHODS: We performed a cohort study using nationwide registries to identify all Danish patients surviving first-time hospitalization for AF between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2006, and their posthospital therapy of warfarin, aspirin, clopidogrel, and combinations of these drugs. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate risks of nonfatal and fatal bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 82,854 of 118,606 patients (69.9%) surviving AF hospitalization had at least 1 prescription filled for warfarin, aspirin, or clopidogrel after discharge. During mean (SD) follow-up of 3.3 (2.6) years, 13,573 patients (11.4%) experienced a nonfatal or fatal bleeding. The crude incidence rate for bleeding was highest for dual clopidogrel and warfarin therapy (13.9% per patient-year) and triple therapy (15.7% per patient-year). Using warfarin monotherapy as a reference, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the combined end point was 0.93 (0.88-0.98) for aspirin, 1.06 (0.87-1.29) for clopidogrel, 1.66 (1.34-2.04) for aspirin-clopidogrel, 1.83 (1.72-1.96) for warfarin-aspirin, 3.08 (2.32-3.91) for warfarin-clopidogrel, and 3.70 (2.89-4.76) for warfarin-aspirin-clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF, all combinations of warfarin, aspirin, and clopidogrel are associated with increased risk of nonfatal and fatal bleeding. Dual warfarin and clopidogrel therapy and triple therapy carried a more than 3-fold higher risk than did warfarin monotherapy.
Diabetes Patients Requiring Glucose-Lowering Therapy and Nondiabetics With a Prior Myocardial Infarction Carry the Same Cardiovascular RiskBACKGROUND: Previous studies reveal major differences in the estimated cardiovascular risk in diabetes mellitus, including uncertainty about the risk in young patients. Therefore, large studies of well-defined populations are needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: All residents in Denmark > or = 30 years of age were followed up for 5 years (1997 to 2002) by individual-level linkage of nationwide registers. Diabetes patients receiving glucose-lowering medications and nondiabetics with and without a prior myocardial infarction were compared. At baseline, 71 801 (2.2%) had diabetes mellitus and 79 575 (2.4%) had a prior myocardial infarction. Regardless of age, age-adjusted Cox proportional-hazard ratios for cardiovascular death were 2.42 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.35 to 2.49) in men with diabetes mellitus without a prior myocardial infarction and 2.44 (95% CI, 2.39 to 2.49) in nondiabetic men with a prior myocardial infarction (P=0.60), with nondiabetics without a prior myocardial infarction as the reference. Results for women were 2.45 (95% CI, 2.38 to 2.51) and 2.62 (95% CI, 2.55 to 2.69) (P=0.001), respectively. For the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death, the hazard ratios in men with diabetes only were 2.32 (95% CI, 2.27 to 2.38) and 2.48 (95% CI, 2.43 to 2.54) in those with a prior myocardial infarction only (P=0.001). Results for women were 2.48 (95% CI, 2.43 to 2.54) and 2.71 (95% CI, 2.65 to 2.78) (P=0.001), respectively. Risks were similar for both diabetes types. Analyses with adjustments for comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and prophylactic medical treatment showed similar results, and propensity score-based matched-pair analyses supported these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Patients requiring glucose-lowering therapy who were > or = 30 years of age exhibited a cardiovascular risk comparable to nondiabetics with a prior myocardial infarction, regardless of sex and diabetes type. Therefore, requirement for glucose-lowering therapy should prompt intensive prophylactic treatment for cardiovascular diseases.
Risk of COVID-19 in health-care workers in Denmark: an observational cohort studyMortality and cardiovascular risk associated with different insulin secretagogues compared with metformin in type 2 diabetes, with or without a previous myocardial infarction: a nationwide studyAIMS: The impact of insulin secretagogues (ISs) on long-term major clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes remains unclear. We examined mortality and cardiovascular risk associated with all available ISs compared with metformin in a nationwide study. METHODS AND RESULTS: All Danish residents >20 years, initiating single-agent ISs or metformin between 1997 and 2006 were followed for up to 9 years (median 3.3 years) by individual-level linkage of nationwide registers. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and the composite of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and cardiovascular mortality associated with individual ISs were investigated in patients with or without previous MI by multivariable Cox proportional-hazard analyses including propensity analyses. A total of 107 806 subjects were included, of whom 9607 had previous MI. Compared with metformin, glimepiride (hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals): 1.32 (1.24-1.40), glibenclamide: 1.19 (1.11-1.28), glipizide: 1.27 (1.17-1.38), and tolbutamide: 1.28 (1.17-1.39) were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients without previous MI. The corresponding results for patients with previous MI were as follows: glimepiride: 1.30 (1.11-1.44), glibenclamide: 1.47 (1.22-1.76), glipizide: 1.53 (1.23-1.89), and tolbutamide: 1.47 (1.17-1.84). Results for gliclazide [1.05 (0.94-1.16) and 0.90 (0.68-1.20)] and repaglinide and [0.97 (0.81-1.15) and 1.29 (0.86-1.94)] were not statistically different from metformin in both patients without and with previous MI, respectively. Results were similar for cardiovascular mortality and for the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy with the most used ISs, including glimepiride, glibenclamide, glipizide, and tolbutamide, seems to be associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular risk compared with metformin. Gliclazide and repaglinide appear to be associated with a lower risk than other ISs.