6 research outputs found
The management of heart failure cardiogenic shock:an international RAND appropriateness panel
Background: Observational data suggest that the subset of patients with heart failure related CS (HF-CS) now predominate critical care admissions for CS. There are no dedicated HF-CS randomised control trials completed to date which reliably inform clinical practice or clinical guidelines. We sought to identify aspects of HF-CS care where both consensus and uncertainty may exist to guide clinical practice and future clinical trial design, with a specific focus on HF-CS due to acute decompensated chronic HF. Methods: A 16-person multi-disciplinary panel comprising of international experts was assembled. A modified RAND/University of California, Los Angeles, appropriateness methodology was used. A survey comprising of 34 statements was completed. Participants anonymously rated the appropriateness of each statement on a scale of 1 to 9 (1–3 as inappropriate, 4–6 as uncertain and as 7–9 appropriate). Results: Of the 34 statements, 20 were rated as appropriate and 14 were rated as inappropriate. Uncertainty existed across all three domains: the initial assessment and management of HF-CS; escalation to temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support (tMCS); and weaning from tMCS in HF-CS. Significant disagreement between experts (deemed present when the disagreement index exceeded 1) was only identified when deliberating the utility of thoracic ultrasound in the immediate management of HF-CS. Conclusion: This study has highlighted several areas of practice where large-scale prospective registries and clinical trials in the HF-CS population are urgently needed to reliably inform clinical practice and the synthesis of future societal HF-CS guidelines
Recommended from our members
Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Hospitalized Heart Failure Outcomes in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry.
BACKGROUND: Neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with worse health outcomes, yet its relationship with in-hospital heart failure (HF) outcomes and quality metrics are underexplored. We examined the association between socioeconomic neighborhood disadvantage and in-hospital HF outcomes for patients from diverse neighborhoods in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. METHODS: SES-disadvantage scores were derived from geocoded US census data using a validated algorithm, which incorporated household income, home value, rent, education, and employment. We examined the association between SES-disadvantage quintiles with all-cause in-hospital mortality, adjusting for demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: Of 593 053 patients hospitalized for HF between 2017 and 2020, 321 314 (54%) had residential ZIP Codes recorded. Patients from the most compared with least disadvantaged neighborhoods were younger (mean age 67 versus 76 years), more often Black (42% versus 9%) or Hispanic (14% versus 5%), and had higher comorbidity burden. Demographic-adjusted length of stay increased by ≈1.5 hours with each increment in worsening SES-disadvantage quintiles. Adjusted-mortality odds ratios increased with worsening SES-disadvantage quintiles (Ptrend=0.003), and was 28% higher (adjusted OR=1.28 [1.12-1.48]) for the most compared with least disadvantaged neighborhood groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients hospitalized for HF from disadvantaged neighborhoods were younger and more often Black or Hispanic. SES disadvantage was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Further research is needed to characterize care delivery patterns in disadvantaged neighborhoods and to address social determinants of health among patients hospitalized for HF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02693509