Establishing a Pragmatic Framework to Optimise Health Outcomes in Heart Failure and Multimorbidity (ARISE-HF): A Multidisciplinary Position Statement

Background Multimorbidity in heart failure (HF), defined as HF of any aetiology and multiple concurrent conditions that require active management, represents an emerging problem within the ageing HF patient population worldwide. Methods To inform this position paper, we performed: 1) an initial review of the literature identifying the ten most common conditions, other than hypertension and ischaemic heart disease, complicating the management of HF (anaemia, arrhythmias, cognitive dysfunction, depression, diabetes, musculoskeletal disorders, renal dysfunction, respiratory disease, sleep disorders and thyroid disease) and then 2) a review of the published literature describing the association between HF with each of the ten conditions. From these data we describe a clinical framework, comprising five key steps, to potentially improve historically poor health outcomes in this patient population. Results We identified five key steps (ARISE-HF) that could potentially improve clinical outcomes if applied in a systematic manner: 1) Acknowledge multimorbidity as a clinical syndrome that is associated with poor health outcomes, 2) Routinely profile (using a standardised protocol — adapted to the local health care system) all patients hospitalised with HF to determine the extent of concurrent multimorbidity, 3) Identify individualised priorities and person-centred goals based on the extent and nature of multimorbidity, 4) Support individualised, home-based, multidisciplinary, case management to supplement standard HF management, and 5) Evaluate health outcomes well beyond acute hospitalisation and encompass all-cause events and a person-centred perspective in affected individuals. Conclusions We propose ARISE-HF as a framework for improving typically poor health outcomes in those affected by multimorbidity in HF

Testing Cost Containment of Future Healthcare with Maintained or Improved Quality—The COSTCARES Project

Increasing healthcare costs need to be contained in order to maintain equality of access to care for all EU citizens. A cross-disciplinary consortium of experts was supported by the EU FP7 research programme, to produce a roadmap on cost containment, while maintaining or improving the quality of healthcare. The roadmap comprises two drivers: person-centred care and health promotion; five critical enablers also need to be addressed: information technology, quality measures, infrastructure, incentive systems, and contracting strategies

Effect of a Hospital and Postdischarge Quality Improvement Intervention on Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Care for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The CONNECT-HF Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Adoption of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure is variable. Interventions to improve guideline-directed medical therapy have failed to consistently achieve target metrics, and limited data exist to inform efforts to improve heart failure quality of care. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a hospital and postdischarge quality improvement intervention compared with usual care on heart failure outcomes and care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted at 161 US hospitals and included 5647 patients (2675 intervention vs 2972 usual care) followed up after a hospital discharge for acute heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The trial was performed from 2017 to 2020, and the date of final follow-up was August 31, 2020. Interventions: Hospitals (n = 82) randomized to a hospital and postdischarge quality improvement intervention received regular education of clinicians by a trained group of heart failure and quality improvement experts and audit and feedback on heart failure process measures (eg, use of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF) and outcomes. Hospitals (n = 79) randomized to usual care received access to a generalized heart failure education website. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were a composite of first heart failure rehospitalization or all-cause mortality and change in an opportunity-based composite score for heart failure quality (percentage of recommendations followed). Results: Among 5647 patients (mean age, 63 years; 33% women; 38% Black; 87% chronic heart failure; 49% recent heart failure hospitalization), vital status was known for 5636 (99.8%). Heart failure rehospitalization or all-cause mortality occurred in 38.6% in the intervention group vs 39.2% in usual care (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.05). The baseline quality-of-care score was 42.1% vs 45.5%, respectively, and the change from baseline to follow-up was 2.3% vs -1.0% (difference, 3.3% [95% CI, -0.8% to 7.3%]), with no significant difference between the 2 groups in the odds of achieving a higher composite quality score at last follow-up (adjusted odds ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.21]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with HFrEF in hospitals randomized to a hospital and postdischarge quality improvement intervention vs usual care, there was no significant difference in time to first heart failure rehospitalization or death, or in change in a composite heart failure quality-of-care score. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03035474

Medication adherence: A call for action

Poor adherence to efficacious cardiovascular related medications has led to considerable morbidity, mortality, and avoidable health care costs. This paper provides results of a recent think tank meeting in which various stakeholder groups representing key experts from consumers, community health providers, the academic community, decision-making government officials (FDA, NIH, etc), and industry scientists met to evaluate the current status of medication adherence and provide recommendations for improving outcomes. Below, we review the magnitude of the problem of medication adherence, prevalence, impact, and cost. We then summarize proven effective approaches and conclude with a discussion of recommendations to address this growing and significant public health issue of medication non adherence

Testing Cost Containment of Future Health Care with Maintained or Improved Quality – The COST CARES project Running title: Cost Containment of Future Health Care

Abstract Background Increasing healthcare costs need to be contained in order to maintain equality of access to care for all EU citizens. A cross‐disciplinary consortium of experts was supported by the EU FP7 research programme, to produce a roadmap on cost containment, while maintaining or improving the quality of healthcare. The roadmap comprises two drivers: person‐centred care and health promotion; five critical enablers also need to be addressed: information technology, quality measures, infrastructure, incentive systems, and contracting strategies. Method In order to develop and test the roadmap, a COST Action project was initiated: COST−CARES, with 28 participating countries. This paper provides an overview of evidence about the effects of each of the identified enablers. Intersections between the drivers and the enablers are identified as critical for the success of future cost containment, in tandem with maintained or improved quality in healthcare. This will require further exploration through testing. Conclusion Cost containment of future healthcare, with maintained or improved quality, needs to be addressed through a concerted approach of testing key factors. We propose a framework for test lab design based on these drivers and enablers in different European countries