Key result
Treatment at different outpatient practices is linked to ~70% higher odds of excellent KCCQ-OS.
Why the study?
The variability across outpatient practices in achieving optimized health status for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is unknown.
Observational (n=3,494)
Yes
Odds Ratio: 1.7 (95% CI 1.54–1.99)
p-value: p=<0.001
There is significant practice-level variability in the health status of outpatients with HFrEF, suggesting that patient-reported health status could serve as a valuable quality measure to improve care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marked practice variation in HFrEF health status may support its use as a quality metric; leaves open whether standardizing care improves outcomes.
Khariton et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=3,494). Treatment at different outpatient practices vs. Other outpatient practices was evaluated on Excellent health status (KCCQ-OS ≥75) (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.54-1.99, p=<0.001). Treatment at one random outpatient practice versus another was associated with a 70% higher odds of having excellent health status (KCCQ-OS ≥75) (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.54-1.99; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: