Key result
Peer support for patients with heart failure did not significantly improve critical outcomes, showing a slight increase in mortality (RR 1.16) and a reduction in readmission rates (RR 0.93).
Why the study?
While peer support is effective in diabetes and mental illness, its impact on patients coping with heart failure remains indeterminate.
Does peer support improve mortality, readmission rate, and quality of life in patients with heart failure?
Meta-Analysis (n=390)
Does peer support improve mortality, readmission rate, and quality of life in patients with heart failure?
Relative Risk: 1.16 (95% CI 0.61–2.21)
Absolute Event Rate: 13.3% vs 11.5%
Peer support for patients with heart failure does not yield substantial improvements in critical outcomes and may be associated with a slight increase in mortality, suggesting it should not be routinely endorsed.
Peer support, which is given by people with similar life experiences and experiential knowledge, has been shown to be effective for patients with diabetes and mental illness. However, the impact of such peer support on patients coping with heart failure remains indeterminate. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to scrutinize the potential benefits of peer support for patients with heart failure. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of peer support for patients with heart failure in contrast to those without peer support. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov until October 2022. We pooled the data on mortality, readmission rate, and quality of life (QoL) as primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence was evaluated by the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. We included three studies with 390 patients with heart failure. Peer support may have resulted in a slight increase in mortality (risk ratio (RR)=1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.61-2.21; low certainty of the evidence) and in a reduction in the readmission rate (RR=0.93, 95% CI=0.74-1.17; low certainty of the evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of peer support on QoL (standardized mean difference 2.03 higher in the intervention group, 95% CI=1.79 lower to 5.84 higher; very low certainty of the evidence). Despite that the certainty is low or very low, the extant data available evidence suggests that peer support may not yield substantial improvements in critical outcomes for patients with heart failure. Consequently, endorsing peer support for patients with heart failure currently seems unjustifiable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nakao et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=390). Peer support vs. Usual care was evaluated on Mortality (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.61-2.21). Peer support for patients with heart failure did not significantly improve critical outcomes, showing a slight increase in mortality (RR 1.16) and a reduction in readmission rates (RR 0.93).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: