title: Randomized trial of a noninvasive strategy to reduce hospital stay for patients with low-risk myocardial infarction.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This study evaluated the feasibility, pertinence and psychosocial repercussions of a noninvasive reduced hospital stay strategy (three days) for low-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction using simple clinical criteria and predischarge 24-h ambulatory ST-segment ischemic monitoring.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Previous studies evaluating shorter stays for uncomplicated myocardial infarction have been limited by retrospective or nonrandomized design and overdependence on invasive cardiac procedures.
  
  
  METHODS
  One-hundred twenty consecutive patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction fulfilling low-risk criteria were randomized 2:1 to a short hospital stay (80 patients) or standard stay (40 patients). Short-stay patients with no ischemia on ST-segment monitoring were discharged on day 3, returning for exercise testing a week later. All analyses were on an intention-to-treat basis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Forty-one percent of all screened patients with acute myocardial infarction would have been medically eligible for the short-stay strategy. Seventeen patients (21%) were not discharged early because of ischemia on ST-monitoring or angina. Median initial hospital stay was halved from 6.9 days in the standard stay to 3.5 days in the short-stay group. At six months, median total days hospitalized were 7.5 in the standard stay and 3.6 in the short-stay group (p < 0.0001). Adverse events and readmissions were low and not significantly different, and there were 25% fewer invasive cardiac procedures in the short-stay group. Psychosocial outcomes, risk factor changes and exercise test results were similar in the two groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This reduced hospital stay strategy for low-risk patients with acute myocardial infarction is feasible and worthwhile, resulting in a substantial and sustained reduction in days hospitalized. It is without unfavorable psychosocial consequences, appears safe and does not increase the number of invasive cardiac procedures.
authors: Quebec Heart Institute/Laval Hospital, Laval University, Ste-Foy, Canada. peter.Bogaty@med.ulval.ca
authors: P
authors: P
authors: Bogaty
authors: S
authors: S
authors: Dumont
authors: G E
authors: GE
authors: O'Hara
authors: L
authors: L
authors: Boyer
authors: L
authors: L
authors: Auclair
authors: J
authors: J
authors: Jobin
authors: J R
authors: JR
authors: Boudreault
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D015716:Electrocardiography, Ambulatory; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D017052:Hospital Mortality; D006801:Humans; D007902:Length of Stay / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000401:mortality / Q000628:therapy*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012307:Risk Factors; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome