 |
|
Prolonged Beneficial Effects of a Home-Based Intervention on Unplanned Readmissions and Mortality Among Patients With Congestive Heart Failure
Simon Stewart, BA, BN;
Annette Joy Vandenbroek, BN;
Sue Pearson, BA;
John David Horowitz, MBBS, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:257-261.
ABSTRACT
| |
Background A single home-based intervention (HBI) applied immediately after hospital discharge in a cohort of "high-risk" patients with congestive heart failure has been shown to decrease numbers of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths during a period of 6 months. The duration of this beneficial effect remains uncertain.
Methods Hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure who had been randomly assigned to receive either usual care (n=48) or HBI 1 week after discharge (n=49) were subject to an extended follow-up of 18 months. The primary end point of the study was frequency of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths. Secondary end points included total hospital stay, frequency of multiple readmissions, cost of hospital-based care, and total mortality.
Results During 18-month follow-up, HBI patients had fewer unplanned readmissions (64 vs 125; P=.02) and out-of-hospital deaths (2 vs 9; P=.02), representing 1.4 ± 1.3 vs 2.7 ± 2.8 events per HBI and usual-care patient, respectively (P=.03). The HBI patients also had fewer days of hospitalization (2.5 ± 2.7 vs 4.5 ± 4.8 per patient; P=.004) and, once readmitted, were less likely to experience 4 or more readmissions (3/31 vs 12/38; P=.03). Hospital-based costs were significantly lower among HBI patients (Aust $5100 vs Aust $10,600 per patient; P=.02). Unplanned readmission was positively correlated with 14 days or more of unplanned readmission in the 6 months before study entry (odds ratio [OR], 5.4; P=.006). Positive correlates of death were (1) non–English speaking (OR, 4.9; P=.008), (2) 14 days or more of unplanned readmission in the 6 months before study entry (OR, 4.9; P=.008), and (3) left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less (OR, 3.0; P=.03); conversely, assignment to HBI was a negative correlate (OR, 0.3; P=.02).
Conclusions In this controlled study, among a cohort of high-risk patients with congestive heart failure, beneficial effects of a postdischarge HBI were sustained for at least 18 months, with a significant reduction in unplanned readmissions, total hospital stay, hospital-based costs, and mortality.
INTRODUCTION
ALTHOUGH THE introduction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors has reduced morbidity and mortality rates among a large proportion of patients with congestive heart failure (CHF),1-5 the cost of treating these patients still represents a disproportionately large component of health care expenditure worldwide.6-11 Attempts to limit this expenditure (estimated to be upward of $10 billion per annum in the United States alone)11 are confounded not only by the increasing prevalence of CHF8, 11-14 and the ongoing management it demands, but by the pattern of recurrent hospital use among a small subset of these patients.6-8,15-22 The treatment of such "high-cost" patients is often complicated by a combination of advanced age, presence of major concomitant disease, and intractable symptoms despite maximal therapy; it is clear that a proportion of patients receive suboptimal treatment.14, 23-26 Two-year mortality among such patients is as high as 80%.13, 27
We have reported the beneficial effects of a postdischarge home-based intervention (HBI) on the frequency of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths (the primary composite end point for the study) during 6-month follow-up of a cohort of "high-risk" patients with CHF.28 We were, however, unable to demonstrate a definitive reduction in hospital-based costs or mortality among patients exposed to the study intervention. To examine the medium-term effects of the intervention on the original primary end point and, more importantly, frequency of recurrent hospital admissions, total hospital stay, cost of hospital-based care, and total mortality, we extended follow-up of all surviving patients for a further 12 months (to a maximum of 18 months after the index hospitalization).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
STUDY COHORT
The study cohort of 97 patients with CHF represented the largest subgroup of medical and surgical patients (n=762) participating in a randomized controlled study examining the effects of a postdischarge home intervention.29 These patients were prospectively selected for more comprehensive follow-up because the combined presence of impaired systolic function (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF]  55%), persistent functional impairment indicative of New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV status, and a history of at least 1 admission for acute heart failure indicated that such patients were at higher risk for subsequent hospitalization and premature mortality, and therefore more likely to benefit from a postdischarge intervention. The study was approved by the hospital's Ethics of Human Research Committee, and all patients signed a consent form before study entry.
STUDY INTERVENTION
Patients were randomly assigned to either a postdischarge HBI (n=49) or to usual care (UC; n=48). Analysis of all the baseline clinical and demographic profiles of the 2 groups of patients demonstrated that the groups were well matched and receiving appropriate pharmacotherapy; a summary of their baseline characteristics is presented in Table 1. The purpose and details of the intervention are more comprehensively described in the original reports.28-29 In summary, however, HBI involved a single home visit 1 week after discharge (by a nurse and a pharmacist) to optimize medication management, identify early clinical deterioration, and intensify medical follow-up and caregiver vigilance where appropriate. During the home visits, almost all patients demonstrated inadequate knowledge of the purpose, effects, and potential adverse effects of their treatment, and approximately 50% were found to be noncompliant with prescribed medication. Approximately one third of patients were referred at this time for immediate review by their primary care physician on the basis of early clinical deterioration and/or adverse medication effects.
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Baseline Characteristics at Index Hospitalization*
|
|
|
STUDY END POINTS
All surviving patients were subject to 18-month follow-up after index hospitalization to determine the frequency of the composite primary end point of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths. Secondary end points were the proportion of patients experiencing an unplanned readmission, frequency distribution of unplanned readmissions, total days of hospitalization, emergency department attendance, overall mortality, and cost of hospital-based health care.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Comparison of end point data involved the following: (1)  2 analysis (with calculation of odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for discrete variables, (2) Mann-Whitney test for all continuous variables, and (3) log-rank test for comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Examination of the interaction between treatment mode and other potential correlates of unplanned admission and mortality involved the use of multiple logistic regression (with entry of variables at a univariate significance level of .2 and stepwise rejection of variables at the .05 level of significance). All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, with significance accepted at the level of .05 (2-sided).
RESULTS
During the 18 months after index hospitalization, 33 (67%) of 49 HBI patients (95% CI, 52%-80%) vs 39 (81%) of 48 UC patients (95% CI, 67%-91%) had experienced either an unplanned admission or an out-of-hospital death (P=.12). Although the 2 groups did not significantly differ in regard to the proportion of patients experiencing a primary end point, patients in the HBI group accumulated significantly fewer unplanned readmissions (64 vs 125; P=.02) and suffered fewer out-of-hospital deaths (2 vs 9; OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 1.0-39; P=.02). The combined total of primary end points was therefore 66 vs 134 for the HBI and UC groups, respectively (1.4 ± 1.3 vs 2.7 ± 2.8 events per patient; P=.03) (Figure 1).
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Cumulative total of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths during 18 months of follow-up (Mann-Whitney test).
|
|
|
Overall, HBI patients required fewer days of hospitalization (both unplanned and elective) than UC patients (10.5 ± 14.4 vs 21.1 ± 24.1 days per patient; P=.02) in addition to accumulating fewer attendances at the emergency department (2.5 ± 2.7 vs 4.5 ± 4.8 per patient; P=.004). On the basis of this reduction in hospital stay and comparable outpatient clinic costs, the calculated cost of hospital-based care per patient was significantly lower for the HBI group (Aust $5100 ± $6800 vs Aust $10,600 ± $13,000; P=.02). The cost of the original home intervention was Aust $190 per HBI patient.
Analysis of the frequency distribution of unplanned readmissions showed that UC patients, once readmitted, were significantly more likely to experience 4 or more readmissions during study follow-up (12/38 vs 3/31; OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.0-22.0; P=.03). Figure 2 shows the frequency distribution of unplanned readmissions for the 2 groups. Overall, 42% (95% CI, 35%-49%) of all unplanned readmissions for the entire cohort were associated with a primary diagnosis of acute heart failure, the remainder being primarily associated with either an acute ischemic syndrome or acute respiratory failure secondary to chronic airway limitation. Once readmitted, UC patients were significantly more likely to require 3 or more admissions for heart failure (8/21 vs 1/18; P=.004).
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Frequency distribution of unplanned readmissions during 18 months of follow-up. HBI indicates home-based intervention; UC, usual care.
|
|
|
Patients assigned to HBI were also more likely to survive the 18-month period after index hospitalization; 11 (22%) of 49 HBI patients (95% CI, 10%-34%) vs 20 (42%) of 48 UC patients (95% CI, 30%-49%) died during follow-up (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.12-0.88; P=.05) (Figure 3).
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier curves for cumulative survival during 18 months of follow-up (log-rank test for comparison of survival curves).
|
|
|
On the basis of initial univariate analysis, the following variables were subjected to multiple logistic regression to determine potential correlates of unplanned readmission: (1) previous admission(s) for acute heart failure, (2) number of days of unplanned hospitalization in the 6 months before study follow-up, (3) plasma albumin concentration on hospital discharge, (4) New York Heart Association class on hospital discharge, and (5) study group. Of these variables, greater hospital use in the 6 months before study follow-up proved to be the only independent, positive correlate of unplanned readmission within 18 months of index hospitalization (Table 2). Similarly, the following variables were examined as potential correlates of mortality: (1) duration of treatment for CHF, (2) number of admissions for acute heart failure, (3) number of days of unplanned hospitalization in the 6 months before study follow-up, (4) LVEF, (5) New York Heart Association class on hospital discharge, (6) English-speaking vs non–English-speaking background, and (7) study group. Of these variables, greater hospital use in the 6 months before study follow-up, a non–English-speaking background, and lower LVEF were independent, positive correlates of 18-month mortality; conversely, assignment to HBI was a negative correlate (Table 3).
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Correlates of Unplanned Readmission During 18-Month Follow-up
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 3. Correlates of Mortality During 18-Month Follow-up
|
|
|
COMMENT
We have reported the beneficial effects of a postdischarge home intervention on the frequency of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths during 6-month follow-up of a cohort of "high-risk" patients with CHF.28 The success of this strategy in reducing subsequent hospital use (42% in comparison with UC patients) was largely mediated via a reduction in repeated admissions for acute heart failure. However, perhaps because of a small sample size, the skewed distribution of costs among UC patients, and limited duration of follow-up, the previous results demonstrated neither definite cost savings nor improved survival.
The current analysis of outcomes among this cohort of patients after 18 months of follow-up was undertaken to determine whether there was any marked accentuation or attenuation of beneficial effects of HBI in the medium term. In this respect, the results of the extended follow-up demonstrated continued benefit in regard to the primary end point of frequency of unplanned readmissions plus out-of-hospital deaths; HBI patients accumulated approximately 50% fewer end points. The data also suggested that the 2 groups continued to diverge in regard to accumulation of these end points in the 12 to 18 months after the single home visit ( Figure 1). Although there was a trend toward fewer HBI patients requiring an unplanned readmission during study follow-up (31/49 vs 38/48; P=.08), the continued differential between groups in accumulating unplanned readmissions potentially reflects the selective effect of HBI on patients otherwise likely to have repeated unplanned readmissions. Rich et al19 also reported that post hoc analysis of the effects of a similar, but more intensive, intervention that was implemented for 3 months after discharge suggested that the beneficial effects of the intervention lasted up to 1 year, although it is not clear whether this was mediated via a sustained reduction in multiple readmissions among intervention patients.19
With larger numbers of patients requiring hospitalization during the extended follow-up, skewness and variability of accumulated costs were less accentuated, and we were able to demonstrate that the approximate 50% reduction in hospital stay among HBI patients translated to a significant reduction in hospital-based costs of a similar magnitude. Once again, however, the subset of patients requiring repeated readmissions contributed disproportionately to the overall costs for their respective groups.
Although the difference in group mortality rates just reached statistical significance, the magnitude of the apparent reduction in mortality among HBI patients was large (approximately 50%). In our original analysis, out-of-hospital death was included in the primary end point to partially adjust for the fact that patients would no longer require hospital admission. However, the frequency of out-of-hospital death alone has proved to be far greater than expected, with significantly more of these events occurring among UC patients, both at 6 months in the original heterogeneous cohort of hospitalized patients29 and at 18 months among this subset of patients with CHF, proving to be the primary difference in both cases in regard to the reduced overall mortality among HBI patients. Such a proportional improvement in survival rates, if verified in larger studies, would be more than comparable with those reported in the original (and larger) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor trials.4-5 The 18-month mortality rate among the UC group in this study was somewhat greater than that reported in more recent clinical trials that have included carefully selected patients with heart failure receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors as standard therapy and generally lower LVEFs.30-31 However, the survival profile of UC patients in the current study, at both 6 and 18 months, is comparable with that reported at 6 and 12 months among similar cohorts of hospitalized patients with CHF included in 3 recently reported studies.22, 26, 32 Furthermore, multivariate analysis demonstrated that the improved survival rate associated with the HBI was independent of other "expected" determinants of mortality, including lower LVEF and a history of more prolonged hospital stay.
Many forms of therapeutic intervention have been shown to be highly effective for a short period, but to have no significant beneficial impact beyond the first few days or weeks after withdrawal of the therapeutic agent.33-34 How and why is it possible for a single posthospitalization intervention to continue to exert a beneficial effect on readmissions and mortality for at least 18 months after implementation? On the basis of a preliminary study,35 we anticipated that an early posthospitalization HBI would not only be beneficial in detecting clinical deterioration likely to lead to short-term hospital readmission(s), but detect hitherto unknown problems likely to contribute to poorer longer-term outcomes. Although we have no direct evidence of mechanisms of beneficial effect of the current HBI, the magnitude of problems detected during home visits requiring remedial action, many of which have been identified previously as contributing to unplanned hospitalization (noncompliance with and/or adverse effects of treatment regimen, early clinical deterioration, and suboptimal use of medical care, especially among non–English-speaking patients), is consistent with 2 previous reports on the mechanisms of beneficial effect of interventions that involve a home visit.18, 36 As regards improved survival, it is possible that a combination of increased vigilance of caregivers, improved compliance, and increased awareness of the therapeutic goals of treatment and better use of available medical care among HBI patients led to a reduced incidence of acute deterioration and death before hospital care could be accessed. However, the precise mechanism(s) of beneficial effect of the HBI in this regard is unlikely to be elucidated.
The fact that we are unable to propose the exact mechanism(s) of beneficial effect of HBI underlines some of the limitations of both the original and extended analyses of this cohort of patients with CHF, although this problem is common to other interventions incorporating a multifaceted approach.23, 36 This study represents a subanalysis of the outcomes of a limited number of patients with CHF, and we have no data regarding functional status and quality of life among surviving patients. Possible refinements of this intervention would include (1) more specific components of education in regard to optimal diet, fluid management, and exercise for patients with CHF; (2) prospective identification of the subset of patients at risk of recurrent admissions; and (3) repeated HBI for those patients with recurrent readmissions despite initial intervention.
Nevertheless, this randomized controlled study (to our knowledge) represents the first report of a nonpharmacological intervention improving survival among hospitalized patients with CHF while significantly reducing hospital readmissions. If the efficacy of this relatively novel approach to treating patients with CHF is confirmed in a prospective randomized controlled trial, it would represent an attractive and relatively cheap means to both improve health outcomes among such patients and deliver significant cost savings.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication May 26, 1998.
Mr Stewart received a National Heart Foundation of Australia Postgraduate Medical Research Scholarship.
Reprints: John David Horowitz, MBBS, PhD, Cardiology Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Rd, Woodville, South Australia, 5011 (e-mail: jhorowitz{at}medicine.adelaide.edu.au).
From the Cardiology Unit, Queen Elizabeth Hospital/University of Adelaide, Woodville, South Australia.
REFERENCES
| |
1. Cohn JN, Johnson G, Ziesche S. A comparison of enalapril with hydralazine-isosorbide dinitrate in the treatment of chronic congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:293-302.
ABSTRACT
2. Captopril Multicentre Research Group. A placebo-controlled trial of captopril in refractory chronic congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1983;2:755-763.
ABSTRACT
3. Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moyle LA, et al. Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: results of the survival and ventricular enlargement (SAVE) trial. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:669-677.
ABSTRACT
4. The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS). N Engl J Med. 1987;316:1429-1435.
ABSTRACT
5. The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:293-302.
6. Garg R, Packer M, Pitt B, Yusuf S. Heart failure in the 1990's: evolution of a major public health problem in cardiovascular medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(suppl A):3A-5A.
7. Hennen J, Krumholz HM, Radford MJ. Twenty most frequent DRG groups among Medicare inpatients age 65 or older in Connecticut hospitals, fiscal years 1991, 1992, and 1993. Conn Med. 1995;59:11-15.
PUBMED
8. McMurray J, McDonagh T, Morrison CE, Dargie HJ. Trends in hospitalization for heart failure in Scotland 1980-1990. Eur Heart J. 1993;14:1158-1162.
FREE FULL TEXT
9. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australian Hospital Statistics 1995-96. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 1997. Health Services Series No. 10.
10. Croft JB, Giles WH, Pollard RA, Casper ML, Anda RF, Livengood JR. National trends in the initial hospitalization for heart failure. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:270-275.
ISI
| PUBMED
11. Rich MW. Epidemiology, pathophysiology, and etiology of congestive heart failure in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:968-974.
ISI
| PUBMED
12. Mark DB. Economics of treating heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80(8B):33H-38H.
13. Ho KK, Pinsky JL, Kannel WB, Levy D. The epidemiology of heart failure: the Framingham Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4, suppl A):6A-13A.
14. Stafford RS, Saglam D, Blumenthal D. National patterns of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use in congestive heart failure. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:2460-2464.
FREE FULL TEXT
15. Krumholz HM, Parent EM, Tu N, et al. Readmission after hospitalization for congestive heart failure among Medicare beneficiaries. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:99-104.
FREE FULL TEXT
16. Gooding J, Jette AM. Hospital readmissions among the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1985;33:595-601.
ISI
| PUBMED
17. Naylor M, Brooten D, Jones R, Lavizzo-Mourey R, Mezey M, Pauley M. Comprehensive discharge planning for the hospitalized elderly. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:999-1006.
FREE FULL TEXT
18. Rich MW, Gray DB, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, Luther P. Effect of a multi-disciplinary intervention on medication compliance in elderly patients with congestive heart failure. Am J Med. 1996;101:270-276.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
19. Rich MW, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, Leven CL, Freedland KE, Carney RM. A multidisciplinary intervention to prevent the readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1995;333:1190-1195.
FREE FULL TEXT
20. Vinson JM, Rich MW, Sperry JC, Shah AS, McNamara T. Early readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1990;38:1290-1295.
ISI
| PUBMED
21. Graves EJ. 1989 Summary: National Hospital Discharge Survey. Hyattsville, Md: National Center for Health Statistics; 1991. Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics, No. 199.
22. Burns RB, McCarthy EP, Moskowitz MA, Ash A, Kane RL, Finch M. Outcomes for older men and women with congestive heart failure. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:276-280.
ISI
| PUBMED
23. Fonarow GC, Stevenson LW, Walden JA, et al. Impact of a comprehensive heart failure management program on hospital readmissions and functional status of patients with advanced heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:725-732.
ABSTRACT
24. Edep ME, Shah NB, Tateo IM, Massie BM. Difference between primary care physicians and cardiologists in management of congestive heart failure: relation to practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:518-526.
ABSTRACT
25. Pearson TA, Peters TD. The treatment gap in coronary artery disease and heart failure: community standards and the post-discharge patient. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80(8B):45H-52H.
26. Reis SE, Holubkov R, Edmundowicz D, et al. Treatment of patients admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure: specialty-related disparities in practice patterns and outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30:733-738.
ABSTRACT
27. Stevenson W, Stevenson L, Middlekauff H, et al. Improving survival for patients with advanced heart failure: a study of 737 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:1417-1423.
ABSTRACT
28. Stewart S, Pearson S, Horowitz JD. Effects of a home-based intervention among patients with congestive heart failure discharged from acute hospital care. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1067-1072.
FREE FULL TEXT
29. Stewart S, Pearson S, Luke CG, Horowitz JD. Effects of a home-based intervention on unplanned readmissions and out-of-hospital deaths. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998;46:174-180.
ISI
| PUBMED
30. The Digitalis Investigation Group. The effect of digoxin on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1997;333:523-533.
31. Prospective Randomized Amlodipine Survival Evaluation Study Group. Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1107-1114.
FREE FULL TEXT
32. Lowe JM, Candlish PM, Henry DA, Wlodarcyk JH, Heller RF, Fletcher PJ. Management and outcomes of congestive heart failure patients: a prospective study of hospitalised patients. Med J Aust. 1998;168:115-118.
ISI
| PUBMED
33. The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) IIb Investigators. A comparison of recombinant hirudin with heparin for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:775-782.
FREE FULL TEXT
34. Swahn E, Wallentin L for the FRISC Study Group. Low-molecular-weight heparin (Fragmin) during instability in coronary artery disease (FRISC). Am J Cardiol. 1997;80(5A):25E-29E.
35. Stewart S, Davey M, Desanctis M, et al. Home medication management: a study of patient post-hospitalisation. Aust Pharmacist. 1995;14:472-476.
36. Alessi CA, Stuck AE, Aronow HU, et al. The process of care in preventive in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:1044-1050.
ISI
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Factors Associated with Caregiver Burden in Heart Failure Family Caregivers
Saunders
West J Nurs Res 2008;30:943-959.
ABSTRACT
Decision-analytic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of management programmes in chronic heart failure
Gohler et al.
Eur J Heart Fail 2008;10:1026-1032.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Long-Term Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study Using Repetitive Education at Six-Month Intervals and Monitoring for Adherence in Heart Failure Outpatients: The REMADHE Trial
Bocchi et al.
Circ Heart Fail 2008;1:115-124.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evidence-Based Interventions to Improve the Palliative Care of Pain, Dyspnea, and Depression at the End of Life: A Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians
Qaseem et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2008;148:141-146.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of pharmaceutical care services on outcomes for home care patients with heart failure
Triller and Hamilton
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2007;64:2244-2249.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Social Networks and Their Relationship to Mental Health Service Use and Expenditures Among Medicaid Beneficiaries
Kang et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2007;58:689-695.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Relationship of Coping Styles With Quality of Life and Depressive Symptoms in Older Heart Failure Patients
Klein et al.
J Aging Health 2007;19:22-38.
ABSTRACT
Extending the Horizon in Chronic Heart Failure: Effects of Multidisciplinary, Home-Based Intervention Relative to Usual Care
Inglis et al.
Circulation 2006;114:2466-2473.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Integrated care prevents hospitalisations for exacerbations in COPD patients
Casas et al.
Eur Respir J 2006;28:123-130.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Prolonged effects of a home-based intervention in patients with chronic illness.
Pearson et al.
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:645-650.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Disease management programmes for older people with heart failure: crucial characteristics which improve post-discharge outcomes
Yu et al.
Eur Heart J 2006;27:596-612.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Managing Abnormal Blood Lipids: A Collaborative Approach
Fletcher et al.
Circulation 2005;112:3184-3209.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
From Hospital to Home and Back Again: A Study in Hospital Admissions and Deaths for Home Care Patients
Taft et al.
Home Health Care Management Practice 2005;17:467-480.
ABSTRACT
Risk of adverse drug events by patient destination after hospital discharge
Triller et al.
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2005;62:1883-1889.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Short- and long-term results of a programme for the prevention of readmissions and mortality in patients with heart failure: Are effects maintained after stopping the programme?
Ojeda et al.
Eur J Heart Fail 2005;7:921-926.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improving the Outcomes of Heart Failure Care: Putting Technology Second
Havranek
J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:1665-1666.
FULL TEXT
The role of nurses in the management of heart failure
Grange
Heart 2005;91:ii39-ii42.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
How much responsibility should heart failure nurses take?
Blue and McMurray
Eur J Heart Fail 2005;7:351-361.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Long-Term Healthcare and Cost Outcomes of Disease Management in a Large, Randomized, Community-Based Population With Heart Failure
Galbreath et al.
Circulation 2004;110:3518-3526.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Comparing Readmission Rates and Mortality Rates in Patients With Heart Failure
Gwadry-Sridhar et al.
Arch Intern Med 2004;164:2315-2320.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The effectiveness of disease management programmes in reducing hospital re-admission in older patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published reports
Gonseth et al.
Eur Heart J 2004;25:1570-1595.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Heart failure clinics and outpatient management: review of the evidence and call for quality assurance
Gustafsson and Arnold
Eur Heart J 2004;25:1596-1604.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Multidisciplinary strategies for the management of heart failure patients at high risk for admission: A systematic review of randomized trials
McAlister et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:810-819.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The use of hospital admission data as a measure of outcome in clinical studies of heart failure
Metcalfe et al.
Eur Heart J 2003;24:105-112.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Fifth report on the provision of services for patients with heart disease
Heart 2002;88:iii1-56.
FULL TEXT
Improving Primary Care for Patients With Chronic Illness: The Chronic Care Model, Part 2
Bodenheimer et al.
JAMA 2002;288:1909-1914.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The role of the specialist nurse
Jolly
Heart 2002;88:ii33-35.
FULL TEXT
Depression-Related Costs in Heart Failure Care
Sullivan et al.
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1860-1866.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Home-based management of patients with chronic heart failure--focus on content not just form!
Ekman and Swedberg
Eur Heart J 2002;23:1323-1325.
FULL TEXT
An economic analysis of specialist heart failure nurse management in the U.K. Can we afford not to implement it?
Stewart et al.
Eur Heart J 2002;23:1369-1378.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Home-Based Intervention in Congestive Heart Failure: Long-Term Implications on Readmission and Survival
Stewart and Horowitz
Circulation 2002;105:2861-2866.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Follow-up services for stroke survivors after hospital discharge-a randomized control study
Andersen et al.
Clin Rehabil 2002;16:593-603.
ABSTRACT
Detecting early clinical deterioration in chronic heart failure patients post-acute hospitalisation--a critical component of multidisciplinary, home-based intervention?
Stewart and Horowitz
Eur J Heart Fail 2002;4:345-351.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Randomized trial of an education and support intervention to preventreadmission of patients with heart failure
Krumholz et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:83-89.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Failing ageing hearts
Petrie et al.
Eur Heart J 2001;22:1978-1990.
Poles apart, but are they the same? A comparative study of Australian and Scottish patients with chronic heart failure
Stewart et al.
Eur J Heart Fail 2001;3:249-255.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Team Management of Patients With Heart Failure : A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the Cardiovascular Nursing Council of the American Heart Association
Grady et al.
Circulation 2000;102:2443-2456.
FULL TEXT
Home-based intervention: the next step in treatment of chronic heart failure?
Horowitz
Eur Heart J 2000;21:1807-1809.
Changes in Home Care Use by Disabled Elderly Persons: 1982-1994
Liu et al.
Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Science 2000;55:S245-S253.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Can Readmission After Stroke Be Prevented? : Results of a Randomized Clinical Study: A Postdischarge Follow-Up Service for Stroke Survivors
Andersen et al.
Stroke 2000;31:1038-1045.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A home based intervention reduced hospital readmissions and mortality in patients with congestive heart failure
Scordo
Evid. Based Nurs. 1999;2:124-124.
FULL TEXT
Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Clinical Practice: The Case of Heart Failure
Rich and Nease
Arch Intern Med 1999;159:1690-1700.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
