3.8 Article

Patient care pathways in acute heart failure and their impact on in-hospital mortality, a French national prospective survey

期刊

IJC HEART & VASCULATURE
卷 26, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100448

关键词

Acute heart failure; Acute cardiac care; Outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Our purpose was to describe the care pathway of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) and investigate whether a management involving a cardiology department had an impact on inhospital mortality. Methods: Between June 2014 and October 2018, we included patients hospitalized for AHF in 24 French hospitals. Characteristics of the episode, patient's care pathway and outcomes were recorded on a specific assessment tool. The primary outcome was the association between patient care pathway and in-hospital mortality. The independent association between admission to a cardiology ward and in-hospital mortality was assessed through a multivariate regression model and propensity score matching. Results: A total of 3677 patients, mean age of 78, were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 8% (n = 287) and was associated on multivariate regression with advanced age, presence of sepsis, of cardio-genic shock, high New York Heart Association (NYHA) score and increased plasma creatinine level on admission. High blood pressure and admission to a cardiology department appeared as protective factors. After propensity score matching, hospitalization in a cardiology department remained a protective factor of in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.61 [0.44-0.84], p = 0.002). Conclusion: A hospital course of care involving a cardiology department was associated with an increase in hospital survival in AHF patients. These finding may highlight the importance of collaboration between cardiologists and other in-hospitals specialties, such as emergency physicians, in order to find the best inhospital pathway for patients with AHF. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

3.8
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