Suppr超能文献

德国一项聚焦于心力衰竭治疗中基于特定水平和循证决策的注册研究:REFLECT-HF。

Registry in Germany focusing on level-specific and evidence-based decision finding in the treatment of heart failure: REFLECT-HF.

作者信息

Tebbe Ulrich, Tschöpe Carsten, Wirtz Jost Henner, Lokies Jan, Turgonyi Eva, Bramlage Peter, Strunz Anke M, Lins Katharina, Böhm Michael

机构信息

Klinikum Lippe-Detmold, Abteilung für Kardiologie, Angiologie und Intensivmedizin, Röntgenstrasse 18, 32756, Detmold, Germany,

出版信息

Clin Res Cardiol. 2014 Aug;103(8):665-73. doi: 10.1007/s00392-014-0678-2. Epub 2014 Feb 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In Germany, care for patients with chronic heart failure (HF) is provided by hospital-based cardiologists (HBC), office-based cardiologists (OBC) and general practitioners (GP). We aimed to compare patient characteristics, diagnostic approaches and therapeutic decisions.

METHODS

Multi-centre, cross-sectional, observational survey at 48 physicians. Patients (n = 384) were required to have previously diagnosed HF and NYHA class ≥ II and/or a left ventricular ejection fraction of <50 %. A total of 384 patients were included at 5 HBCs, 26 OBCs and 18 GPs.

RESULTS

A mean of 18.8 % of all patients at HBCs practices had heart failure, compared to a smaller proportion of 13.9 and 6.7 % at OBCs and GPs, respectively. Echo facility was available for all HBCs and OBCs, but for 16.7 % of GPs (p < 0.0001 for trend). Patients at HBCs had a higher NYHA class (65.6 % had class III/IV; p < 0.0001) compared to 36.8 % at OBCs and 39.3 % at GPs. Usage of three guideline-recommended pharmaceutical treatments was more than 80 %: diuretics (83.1 %), renin-angiotensin system blocking agents (91.4 %) and betablockers (90.1 %) with no differences between physician groups. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs, overall 47.7 %) were more frequently prescribed by OBCs (54.7 %; p = 0.0007 for trend) than HBCs (43.8 %) and GPs (31.0 %). Ivabradin was not frequently used (11.0 % at OBCs, 4.9 % at HBCs and 0 % at GPs; p = 0.0163 for trend). The proportion of patients with CRT (8.6 %), ICD (23.5 %) and CABG (23.1 %) was not statistically different between groups.

CONCLUSION

REFLECT-HF demonstrates that there are some differences in evidence-based treatment decisions between the three main health services (HBC, OBC and GP) providing care for patients with HF in Germany. Advocating adherence to guideline recommendations and earlier adoption of these evidence-based treatments across all levels of care might further improve patient care.

摘要

背景

在德国,慢性心力衰竭(HF)患者的护理由医院心内科医生(HBC)、门诊心内科医生(OBC)和全科医生(GP)提供。我们旨在比较患者特征、诊断方法和治疗决策。

方法

对48名医生进行多中心、横断面观察性调查。患者(n = 384)需先前已诊断为HF且纽约心脏协会(NYHA)分级≥II级和/或左心室射血分数<50%。在5个HBC、26个OBC和18个GP处共纳入384例患者。

结果

HBC诊所所有患者中平均有18.8%患有心力衰竭,相比之下,OBC和GP处的这一比例分别为较小的13.9%和6.7%。所有HBC和OBC都有超声心动图设备,但16.7%的GP没有(趋势p < 0.0001)。与OBC处的36.8%和GP处的39.3%相比,HBC处的患者NYHA分级更高(65.6%为III/IV级;p < 0.0001)。三种指南推荐药物治疗的使用率超过80%:利尿剂(83.1%)、肾素 - 血管紧张素系统阻断剂(91.4%)和β受体阻滞剂(90.1%),医生组之间无差异。盐皮质激素受体拮抗剂(MRAs,总体47.7%)在OBC处(54.7%;趋势p = 0.0007)比HBC处(43.8%)和GP处(31.0%)更常被处方。伊伐布雷定使用不频繁(OBC处11.0%,HBC处4.9%,GP处0%;趋势p = 0.0163)。心脏再同步化治疗(CRT)、植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)和冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者的比例在组间无统计学差异。

结论

REFLECT - HF研究表明,在德国为HF患者提供护理的三种主要医疗服务(HBC、OBC和GP)之间,基于证据的治疗决策存在一些差异。倡导各级护理都坚持指南推荐并更早采用这些基于证据的治疗方法可能会进一步改善患者护理。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验