Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2026

Semi-Minimal Invasive Method to Induce Myocardial Infarction in Rats and the Assessment of Cardiac Function by an Isolated Working Heart System
Published on: June 11, 2020
Is it possible to distribute a scarce resource equitably? Access to invasive procedures for patients with acute
Phillip Insull1, Ritwik Kejriwal, Hitesh Patel
1Whakatane Hospital, Whakatane.
Insights
Patients with myocardial infarction experienced longer waits for cardiac catheterisation and percutaneous coronary intervention at hospitals without on-site facilities. This highlights disparities in timely cardiac care access for heart attack patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Timely intervention is crucial for myocardial infarction (MI) patients.
- Access to on-site cardiac catheterisation facilities impacts treatment delays.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare waiting times for inpatient cardiac catheterisation between a hospital with an on-site facility (Auckland City Hospital, ACH) and a referring hospital (North Shore Hospital, NSH).
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of inpatient data for patients admitted with MI.
- Comparison of time to coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention between ACH and NSH.
Main Results:
- Patients from NSH (without on-site facility) had significantly longer median delays for coronary angiography (6 vs. 3 days) and percutaneous coronary intervention (6 vs. 3 days) compared to ACH patients.
- Fewer NSH patients received timely procedures within 48 hours of admission (coronary angiography: 11% vs. 36%; percutaneous coronary intervention: 12% vs. 41%).
Conclusions:
- Inpatients with MI face longer delays for essential cardiac procedures at hospitals lacking on-site invasive facilities.
- On-site cardiac catheterisation facilities are critical for reducing treatment delays and improving timely care for heart attack patients.
Aims:
To compare waiting times for inpatient cardiac catheterisation between a hospital with on-site cardiac catheterisation facility (Auckland City Hospital, ACH) and one of its referring hospitals (North Shore Hospital, NSH).
Methods:
Patients were included if they were admitted ACH or NSH with a myocardial infarction, and subsequently underwent inpatient coronary angiography.
Results:
853 patients were identified from NSH and 600 from ACH. Patients from NSH waited significantly longer for coronary angiography (median delay 6 versus 3 days, p<0.0009) and fewer underwent this procedure within 48 hours of admission (11% versus 36%, p<0.0009). Delays in percutaneous coronary intervention were significantly longer for NSH patients (6 versus 3 days, p<0.0009), and fewer NSH patients underwent this procedure within 48 hours (12% versus 41%, p<0.0009).
Conclusions:
Inpatients with myocardial infarction waited longer for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention at a hospital without invasive facility than similar patients at the regional referral hospital with on-site invasive facility.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Angina V: Nursing Management
