Management and outcome in foreign-born vs native-born patients with myocardial infarction in Sweden
Main finding · 1-year MACEResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 0.85 95% CI 0.73–0.98Authors' conclusion
This study shows that in a system with universal healthcare coverage in which acute and secondary preventive treatments do not differ by country of birth, foreign-born patients, despite higher CV risk factor burden, will do at least as well as native-born patients.
Study context
- Population
- Myocardial infarction (MI) patients in the nationwide Swedish SWEDEHEART registry15% foreign-born
- Participants
- 194,259 patients
- Exposure
- Foreign-born vs native-born MI patients, by geographic region of birth
- Outcome
- MACE:
- All-cause death
- MI
- Stroke
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Methodological detailsnationwide, propensity-score matched
- Nationwide
- Propensity-score matched
Main finding
1-year MACE
Hazard ratio
0.85
95% CI 0.73–0.98
Asia-bornvs Native-born
HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.73–0.98)
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | Estimate | |
|---|---|---|
| Mortality (1-year MACE component), Asia-bornAsia-bornvs Native-born | HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.57–0.91) | |
| Revascularization, Asia-bornAsia-bornvs Native-born | OR 1.16 (95% CI 1.04–1.30) | |
| 0.512Ratio (log scale) |
Revascularization, Asia-born
- Higher likelihood of statin and beta-blocker prescription at discharge (Asia-born)
30-day mortality, Asia-born
- Lower risk of 30-day mortality (Asia-born)
- 34%
Long-term follow-up (up to 12 years)
- Results persisted over long-term follow-up
Original publication
Management and outcome in foreign-born vs native-born patients with myocardial infarction in Sweden. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. Published 7 March 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →