McKee Sinéad P, Leslie Stephen J, LeMaitre John P, Webb David J, Denvir Martin A
Cardiology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, EH4 2XU, Edinburgh, UK.
Eur J Heart Fail. 2003 Aug;5(4):549-55. doi: 10.1016/s1388-9842(03)00003-5.
There are now a number of guidelines outlining the diagnosis and management of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The extent to which these guidelines are used and the effects on patient outcomes are not well known. The aim of this study was to examine the implementation of a heart failure guideline among cardiologist and non-cardiologist physicians in a university hospital setting. Case record data were examined from 400 patients with a primary diagnosis of CHF. Management of these patients was assessed using a systolic heart failure guideline (Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network, number 35) as a benchmark. Hospital admission data were examined contemporaneously over a 17-month period to assess associations between adherence to drug therapies and number of admissions. Overall, there was poor adherence to the guideline, with relatively high use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) (80%), low use of beta-blockers (32%) and digoxin (36%), and very low use of spironolactone (13%). Cardiologists used more beta-blockers (37 vs. 21%, P=0.003) and digoxin in sinus rhythm (18 vs. 5%, P<0.001) than non-cardiologists. Hospital admission rate was individually associated with increasing age, NYHA status, beta-blocker, diuretic and spironolactone prescription (all P<0.001). At multivariable analysis, only age, NYHA status and increased diuretic prescription were associated with more frequent admission (P<0.001, R(2)=0.15). Despite carefully designed guidelines, the implementation of evidence-based therapies for CHF remains inadequate, even in a university hospital environment. This may reflect a lack of organisational developments to facilitate the increasingly complex management of patients with CHF.
目前有许多指南概述了慢性心力衰竭(CHF)患者的诊断和管理。这些指南的使用程度及其对患者预后的影响尚不清楚。本研究的目的是在大学医院环境中,调查心脏病专家和非心脏病专家对心力衰竭指南的实施情况。对400例初步诊断为CHF的患者的病历数据进行了检查。以收缩性心力衰竭指南(苏格兰校际指南网络,第35号)为基准,评估这些患者的管理情况。同时检查了17个月期间的住院数据,以评估药物治疗依从性与住院次数之间的关联。总体而言,对该指南的依从性较差,血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)抑制剂/血管紧张素II受体阻滞剂(ARB)的使用率相对较高(80%),β受体阻滞剂(32%)和地高辛(36%)的使用率较低,而螺内酯的使用率极低(13%)。心脏病专家比非心脏病专家更多地使用β受体阻滞剂(37%对21%,P = 0.003)和窦性心律时使用地高辛(18%对5%,P < 0.001)。住院率与年龄增加、纽约心脏协会(NYHA)心功能分级、β受体阻滞剂、利尿剂和螺内酯处方有关(均P < 0.001)。在多变量分析中,只有年龄、NYHA心功能分级和利尿剂处方增加与更频繁的住院有关(P < 0.001,R(2)=0.15)。尽管有精心设计的指南,但即使在大学医院环境中,CHF循证治疗的实施仍然不足。这可能反映出缺乏组织发展来促进对CHF患者日益复杂的管理。