4.8 Article

Association of Interstage Home Monitoring With Mortality, Readmissions, and Weight Gain A Multicenter Study from the National Pediatric Cardiology Quality Improvement Collaborative

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 132, 期 6, 页码 502-508

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.014107

关键词

heart defects; congenital; home care services; hypoxia; mortality; patient readmission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Daily home monitoring of oxygen saturation and weight has been reported to improve outcomes for patients with single-ventricle heart disease during the period between stage I palliation and stage II palliation. However, these studies have been limited to single institutions and used historical control subjects. Our objective was to determine the association of various interstage home monitoring strategies with outcomes using a multicenter cohort with contemporary control subjects. Methods and Results We performed a retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data from the National Pediatric Cardiology Quality Improvement Collaborative from 2008 to 2012. We compared interstage mortality, unscheduled readmissions, and change in weight-for-age Z score for various home monitoring strategies of oxygen saturation (n=494) or weight (n=472), adjusting for sex, syndrome, tricuspid regurgitation, arch obstruction, and shunt type. Overall interstage mortality was 8.1%, and 47% had 1 unscheduled readmission. We did not find any associations of home oxygen saturation or weight monitoring with mortality or readmission. Although there was no difference in weight-for-age Z score for daily (0.330.12) versus weekly (0.34 +/- 0.18, P=0.98) weight monitoring, daily home weight monitoring was superior to no home weight monitoring (-0.15 +/- 0.18; P<0.01). Conclusions Home weight monitoring is associated with improved weight gain during the interstage period, but we did not find any benefits in other clinical outcomes for either home oxygen saturation monitoring or home weight monitoring.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据