Nucifora Gaetano, Albanese Maria Cecilia, De Biaggio Paola, Caliandro Donato, Gregori Dario, Goss Paolo, Miani Daniela, Fresco Claudio, Rossi Paolo, Bulfoni Alessandro, Fioretti Paolo Maria
Cardiology Unit, Cardiopulmonary Science Department, S. Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2006 Aug;7(8):614-22. doi: 10.2459/01.JCM.0000237910.34000.58.
Heart failure (HF) is a major health problem resulting in a high financial burden for the healthcare system. Many previous HF management programmes reduced adverse clinical outcomes and costs, but they usually involved several professional figures as well as huge investments, requiring resources and budgets not often available in our healthcare system. We evaluated the effects of our HF management programme, which included patient education and regular outpatient contact with the HF team, on re-hospitalisation and death, optimising the few resources already available at our hospital.
Two hundred consecutive patients admitted to the internal medicine department with a diagnosis of HF were randomised to the intervention group (nurse-led education programme, facilitated telephone communication and follow-up visits with an internist at 15 days, 1 and 6 months) or to the usual care group (follow-up by their primary care physician). The primary endpoints were all-cause readmissions and all-cause deaths during the 6-month post-discharge period.
There were 81 all-cause hospital readmissions in the intervention group and 82 in the control group (P = NS). Fourteen patients (14%) in the intervention group and eight patients (8%) in the control group died during the study period (P = NS). Unplanned outpatient visits were less frequent in the intervention group than in the control group (39 [28%] versus 99 [72%], P < 0.001).
The present low-cost HF management programme reduced unplanned outpatient visits but proved ineffective in reducing subsequent readmissions and in improving clinical status. More intense follow-up monitoring and more resources are needed to achieve better results.
心力衰竭(HF)是一个重大的健康问题,给医疗系统带来了沉重的经济负担。以前的许多心力衰竭管理项目降低了不良临床结局和成本,但通常涉及多个专业人员以及巨额投资,需要我们医疗系统中并不常有的资源和预算。我们评估了我们的心力衰竭管理项目(包括患者教育以及与心力衰竭团队定期门诊接触)对再住院率和死亡率的影响,同时优化我们医院现有的少量资源。
连续200例因心力衰竭诊断入住内科的患者被随机分为干预组(由护士主导的教育项目、便利的电话沟通以及在15天、1个月和6个月时由内科医生进行随访)或常规护理组(由其初级保健医生进行随访)。主要终点是出院后6个月内的全因再入院和全因死亡。
干预组有81例全因住院再入院,对照组有82例(P = 无显著差异)。在研究期间,干预组有14例患者(14%)死亡,对照组有8例患者(8%)死亡(P = 无显著差异)。干预组计划外门诊就诊的频率低于对照组(39次[28%]对99次[72%],P < 0.001)。
目前的低成本心力衰竭管理项目减少了计划外门诊就诊,但在减少随后的再入院率和改善临床状况方面被证明无效。需要更密集的随访监测和更多资源以取得更好的结果。