 |
|
Surveillance of Sudden Death After Myocardial Infarction
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: We have some concerns about the design of the surveillance study of sudden death after myocardial infarction (MI) by Dr Adabag and colleagues.1 First, the Mayo Clinic provides half of the primary care and nearly all specialty care for the community.2 A high proportion of the working population was employed in the health care industry. In addition to race and ethnicity, local diagnosis and treatment characteristics and the degree of awareness of disease may influence the outcome and prognosis of MI. These characteristics of this study population were not representative of a general population and therefore may not be valid for accurate comparisons to be made across geographic regions.
Second, from 1979 to 2005 diagnosis and understanding of MI evolved enormously. The target International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes should have included 402 (hypertensive heart disease), 427 (cardiac dysrhythmia), 428 (heart failure), 518.4 . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Zhijing Zhao, MD
zhaozhj@fmmu.edu.cn
Cardiology Department
Hao Guan, MD
Department of Burns
Lei Shang, PhD
Department of Statistics
Xijing Hospital
Xi’an, China
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Sudden Death After Myocardial Infarction
A. Selcuk Adabag, Terry M. Therneau, Bernard J. Gersh, Susan A. Weston, and Véronique L. Roger
JAMA. 2008;300(17):2022-2029.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED LETTER
Surveillance of Sudden Death After Myocardial Infarction—Reply
Véronique L. Roger, A. Selcuk Adabag, and Susan A. Weston
JAMA. 2009;301(11):1123-1124.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
