Why the study?
Heart failure is associated with high readmission and mortality rates, driving a need for measures to improve outcomes.
Does a protocol-based follow-up program reduce readmission and mortality in patients discharged after acute heart failure?
Does a protocol-based follow-up program reduce readmission and mortality in patients discharged after acute heart failure?
A structured, protocol-based follow-up program for heart failure patients after discharge significantly reduces readmissions and mortality while improving quality of life.
May support structured HF follow-up to reduce readmissions; leaves open whether benefits hold in randomized trials.
Heart failure is associated with high rates of readmission and mortality, and there is a need for measures to improve outcomes. This study aims to assess the impact of the implementation of a protocol-based follow-up program for heart failure patients on readmission and mortality rates and quality of life. A quasi-experimental study was performed, with a prospective registry of 50 consecutive patients discharged after hospitalization for acute heart failure. The study group was followed by a cardiologist at days 7-10 and the first, third, sixth and 12th month after discharge, with predefined procedures. The control group consisted of patients hospitalized for heart failure prior to implementation of the program and followed on a routine basis. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding mean age (67.1±11.2 vs. 65.8±13.4 years, p=0.5), NYHA functional class (p=0.37), or median left ventricular ejection fraction (27% [19.8-35.3] vs. 29% [23.5-40]; p=0.23) at discharge. Mean follow-up after discharge was similar (11±5.3 vs. 10.9±5.5 months, p=0.81). The protocol-based follow-up program was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause readmission (26% vs. 60%, p=0.003), heart failure readmission (16% vs. 36%, p=0.032), and mortality (4% vs. 20%, p=0.044). In the study group there was a significant improvement in all quality of life measures (p<0.001). A protocol-based follow-up program for patients with heart failure led to a significant reduction in readmission and mortality rates, and was associated with better quality of life. Os doentes com insuficiência cardíaca (IC) apresentam taxas elevadas de reinternamento e mortalidade, tornando necessária a implementação de medidas que conduzam à sua redução. Avaliou-se o impacto da implementação de um programa de seguimento estruturado de doentes com IC nas taxas de reinternamento e mortalidade e na qualidade de vida. Estudo quasi-experimental, de registo prospetivo, que incluiu 50 doentes consecutivos com alta após internamento por insuficiência cardíaca aguda. Os doentes iniciaram seguimento protocolado após alta, por cardiologista, com consulta aos 7-10 dias, 1, 3, 6 e 12 meses, com procedimentos pré-definidos. O grupo-controlo foi constituído por doentes internados por insuficiência cardíaca previamente à implementação do programa, seguidos após a alta em consultas de rotina. Não houve diferenças entre ambos os grupos no respeitante à idade média (67,1±11,2 versus 65,8±13,4 anos; p=0,5), classe funcional da NYHA (p=0,37) e mediana da fração de ejeção do ventrículo esquerdo [27% (19,8-35,3) versus 29% (23,5-40); p=0,23] à data da alta; o tempo de seguimento médio foi idêntico (11±5,3 versus 10,9±5,5 meses; p=0,81). O seguimento protocolado associou-se a redução significativa das taxas de reinternamento por qualquer causa (26% versus 60%, p=0,003), reinternamento por insuficiência cardíaca (16% versus 36%, p=0,032) e mortalidade total (4% versus 20%, p=0,044). No grupo em estudo verificou-se melhoria significativa em todos os parâmetros de qualidade de vida (p<0,001). Um programa de seguimento protocolado de doentes com insuficiência cardíaca permitiu redução significativa nas taxas de reinternamento e mortalidade e associou-se a melhoria da qualidade de vida.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Agostinho et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: