Physicians' guideline adherence is associated with long-term heart failure mortality in outpatients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the QUALIFY international registry

Background: Physicians' adherence to guideline-recommended therapy is associated with short-term clinical outcomes in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, its impact on longer-term outcomes is poorly documented. Here, we present results from the 18-month follow-up of the QUALIFY registry. Methods and results: Data at 18 months were available for 6118 ambulatory HFrEF patients from this international prospective observational survey. Adherence was measured as a continuous variable, ranging from 0 to 1, and was assessed for five classes of recommended HF medications and dosages. Most deaths were cardiovascular (CV) (228/394) and HF-related (191/394) and the same was true for unplanned hospitalizations (1175 CV and 861 HF-related hospitalizations, out of a total of 1541). According to univariable analysis, CV and HF deaths were significantly associated with physician adherence to guidelines. In multivariable analysis, HF death was associated with adherence level [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87–0.99 per 0.1 unit adherence level increase; P = 0.034] as was composite of HF hospitalization or CV death (SHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94–0.99 per 0.1 unit adherence level increase; P = 0.043), whereas unplanned all-cause, CV or HF hospitalizations were not (all-cause: SHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.9–1.02; CV: SHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96–1.01; and HF: SHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96–1.02 per 0.1 unit change in adherence score; P = 0.52, P = 0.2, and P = 0.4, respectively). Conclusion: These results suggest that physicians' adherence to guideline-recommended HF therapies is associated with improved outcomes in HFrEF. Practical strategies should be established to improve physicians' adherence to guidelines. © 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2019 European Society of Cardiolog

Surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery in children: An international, multicentre, prospective cohort study

Introduction Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). However, there is a lack of data available about SSI in children worldwide, especially from low-income and middle-income countries. This study aimed to estimate the incidence of SSI in children and associations between SSI and morbidity across human development settings. Methods A multicentre, international, prospective, validated cohort study of children aged under 16 years undergoing clean-contaminated, contaminated or dirty gastrointestinal surgery. Any hospital in the world providing paediatric surgery was eligible to contribute data between January and July 2016. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI by 30 days. Relationships between explanatory variables and SSI were examined using multilevel logistic regression. Countries were stratified into high development, middle development and low development groups using the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Results Of 1159 children across 181 hospitals in 51 countries, 523 (45·1%) children were from high HDI, 397 (34·2%) from middle HDI and 239 (20·6%) from low HDI countries. The 30-day SSI rate was 6.3% (33/523) in high HDI, 12·8% (51/397) in middle HDI and 24·7% (59/239) in low HDI countries. SSI was associated with higher incidence of 30-day mortality, intervention, organ-space infection and other HAIs, with the highest rates seen in low HDI countries. Median length of stay in patients who had an SSI was longer (7.0 days), compared with 3.0 days in patients who did not have an SSI. Use of laparoscopy was associated with significantly lower SSI rates, even after accounting for HDI. Conclusion The odds of SSI in children is nearly four times greater in low HDI compared with high HDI countries. Policies to reduce SSI should be prioritised as part of the wider global agenda

Impact of COVID-19 on Cardiovascular Testing in the United States Versus the Rest of the World

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-U.S. institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection