Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Lynda Blue a Department of Cardiology, Western Infirmary,
Dumbarton Road, Glasgow G12 6NT, b Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow,
Glasgow G12 8QQ, c Greater Glasgow Health
Board, Dalian House, Glasgow G3 8YT Correspondence
to: J J V McMurray j.mcmurray{at}bio.gla.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objectives:
To determine whether specialist nurse
intervention improves outcome in patients with chronic heart failure.
Design:
Randomised controlled trial.
Setting:
Acute medical admissions unit in a teaching hospital.
Participants:
165 patients admitted with heart failure
due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The intervention started before discharge and continued thereafter with home visits for up to 1 year.
Main outcome measures:
Time to first event analysis of
death from all causes or readmission to hospital with worsening heart failure.
Results:
31 patients (37%) in the intervention group died or were readmitted with heart failure compared with 45 (53%) in
the usual care group (hazard ratio=0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 0.96).Compared with usual care, patients in the intervention group had fewer readmissions for any reason (86 v 114, P=0.018), fewer admissions for heart failure (19 v 45, P<0.001) and spent fewer days in hospital for heart failure (mean 3.43 v 7.46 days, P=0.0051).
Conclusions:
Specially trained nurses can improve the
outcome of patients admitted to hospital with heart failure.
|
What is already known on this topic
What this study adds
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Chronic heart failure is a huge public health problem. Patients have a worse prognosis than those with most cancers and require frequent, prolonged, and costly admissions to hospital. 1 2 Readmission rates are also high, and the burden of illness and related expenditure is set to increase considerably in the future.1
Heart failure is not managed optimally. 3 4 Most patients are not looked after by specialists and have little knowledge of their condition and its treatment. Effective therapies are underprescribed. 3 4 Patients are rarely prescribed exercise or given dietary advice or immunisation against influenza and pneumococcus. Patients often do not adhere to their drugs. 3 4 Many hospital admissions may therefore be avoidable. 3 4
Specialist nurses may help overcome the deficiencies in care of
patients with heart failure.
5 6
We describe a randomised controlled trial to determine whether nurse intervention, when used in
addition to routine care, can reduce the morbidity and mortality
related to chronic heart failure. We randomised patients managed by
general physicians and general practitioners, who care for most people
with chronic heart failure.
| |
Participants and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Participants
Patients who were admitted as an emergency to the acute
medical admissions unit at the Western Infirmary, Glasgow, with heart
failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction were eligible for
this study. Patients were recruited between March 1997 and November
1998 and followed up for a mean of 12 months. We excluded patients who
were unable or unwilling to give informed consent or to comply with the
intervention and those who had an acute myocardial infarction,
comorbidity (such as malignancy) likely to lead to death or readmission
in the near future, planned discharge to long term residential care, or
residence outside the hospital's catchment area. Echocardiographic
left ventricular systolic function was graded semiquantitatively
(normal or mildly, moderately, or severely reduced) in keeping with the
hospital's usual practice.
Randomisation
Eligible patients who gave consent were randomised to usual care
or nurse intervention. Study nurses phoned the Robertson Centre for
Biostatistics and the patient was allocated to one or other
intervention group from a randomisation list. The study was approved by
both the local hospital and general practice ethics committees.
Intervention
Patients in the usual care group were managed as usual by the
admitting physician and, subsequently, general practitioner. They were
not seen by the specialist nurses after hospital discharge.
| |
End points and statistical analysis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The primary end point of this study was death from all
causes or hospital admission for heart failure (emergency or elective). The estimated rate of this end point was 55% at one year in the usual
care group. With 82 patients in each treatment group we had an 80%
power at a significance of 5% to detect an absolute difference of
23%
that is, a rate in the nurse intervention group of 32%). The
reduction in relative risk of 42% was predicted from earlier studies
of nurse intervention.7-9
|
|
Secondary end points included death or hospital admission for any reason, hospital admission for worsening chronic heart failure, and all cause admission to hospital. We also analysed numbers of patients admitted, number of admissions, and days spent in hospital.
We obtained data on admissions and deaths from the hospital records department, the information and statistics division of the Scottish NHS (hospital admissions) and the Registrar General's Office, Scotland (deaths).2 All hospital admissions were adjudicated blind to treatment allocation.
We compared rates of death, death or readmission, and cause
specific readmission between the groups on a time to first event basis
using the log rank test. We calculated 95% confidence intervals for
hazard ratios from Cox proportional hazard models with treatment as the
sole covariate. For the outcome of death before discharge, we
compared the results using Fisher's exact test. Rates of readmission were compared by Poisson regression, with adjustment for the length of
follow up. We compared the numbers of days spent in hospital using
bootstrap two sample t tests. The data were first
transformed by taking natural logarithms of the length of stay in days
plus one day. Bootstrap 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the differences between the group means of the transformed data. We
used the natural exponentials of the estimates and end points of the
confidence intervals for presentation purposes, so that they could be
interpreted as ratios. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to construct
estimated survival curves.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We screened 801 patients thought to have heart failure on admission. Of the 361 who were eligible for the study and survived to have echocardiography, 177 (49%) had left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Of these, 165 gave consent and were randomised, 81 to the usual care group and 84 to the nurse intervention group (fig 1). Table 1 shows their clinical characteristics.
|
By discharge, more patients in the intervention group than the usual care group had started an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and stopped a calcium channel blocker (table 2). Length of hospital stay (median, interquartile range) was shorter in the intervention group (median 8.0 (interquartile range 4-10) days v 9.0 (7-12) days in usual care group). The median (interquartile range) time until death or end of study was 365 (277-365) days in the usual care group and 365 (273-365) days in the intervention group.
|
Table 3 summarises the clinical results. Death rates were similar in the two groups, with 31% and 30% dying in the usual care and nurse intervention groups, respectively. For our primary end point (all cause death or admission with chronic heart failure) fewer patients had events in the nurse intervention group than in the usual care group (31 v 43; hazard ratio=0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.38 to 0.96). Figure 2 shows the Kaplan-Meier curve.
|
Death or readmission from all causes was reduced by 28% (0.72, 0.49 to 1.04) in the nurse intervention group compared with usual care (table 3). The risk of admission to hospital for worsening heart failure was reduced by 62% (0.38, 0.19 to 0.76) in the intervention group.
When we took the number of readmissions for each patient into account,
the differences between the treatment groups were greater (table 3).
The number of admissions/patient/month was 0.174 in the usual care
group and 0.124 in the intervention group (rate ratio 0.71, 95%
confidence interval 0.54 to 0.94) for all cause admissions; the
corresponding rates for admission for heart failure were 0.069 and
0.027 (0.40, 0.23 to 0.71).
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We found that intervention by a specialist nurse can substantially reduce the risk of readmission to hospital for heart failure. Although 16 fewer primary events occurred per 100 patients treated, the benefit was solely related to hospital admissions and not deaths, as would be expected in a small study with a relatively short follow up. Reduced readmission is, however, a worthwhile aim of treatment. The benefit was seen in older patients, many of whom were women. Both these groups have been under-represented in trials of drugs for heart failure.1
One limitation of our study is that it was conducted before there was
good evidence to support the general use of
blockers for heart
failure. One objective of nurse intervention, however, is to increase
the use of effective treatments, and nurse intervention seems ideally
suited to facilitate the slow, cautious, up-titration required with
blockers.
Other studies
Our study differs from three published randomised trials of nurse
intervention in heart failure.7-9 Cline et al, in Sweden,
used a clinic based nurse intervention.7 They found only a
trend to reduced readmissions. In the United States, Rich et al used a
multidisciplinary intervention involving a specially trained nurse,
dietician, geriatric cardiologist, social services, and home care
services.8 The intervention started before discharge and
was supplemented after discharge by home visits and telephone contact
with members of the study team. The treatment objectives were similar
to ours, although it is difficult to tell from the published report
whether the level of nurse intervention was as intensive. The benefit
of intervention was less clear. Among 282 patients randomised, survival
free of readmission at 90 days (the primary end point) was 54% in the
control group and 64% in the treatment group (not significant). The
risk of readmission was reduced (absolute risk reduction 13%, P=0.03)
and the number of admissions for heart failure was halved. Neither of
these studies had a follow up of more than six months.
Implications
Collectively, these studies suggest that, in addition to education
about heart failure and its treatment, the key components of successful
intervention are regular contact with patients to detect clinical
deterioration and continued adjustment and optimisation of
treatment.
5 9
In our study, the dose of angiotensin
converting enzyme inhibitor had increased more in the intervention than
in the usual care group, even before discharge. This may have
contributed to the reduction in hospital admissions.10
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank Professors Dargie and Reid for their help in the planning and implementation of this study. We also thank the physicians and nurses working in the acute medical admissions unit and local general practitioners for allowing us to study their patients. We thank A Trainer for additional statistical analysis.
Contributors: JJVMcM, CEM, and IF were involved in planning the study and wrote the study protocol. LB and EL were the two specialist nurses. EC prepared summaries of all hospital admissions for the end point committee (DRM, MCP, JJVMcM). APD, TMcD, DRM, MCP, and JJVMcM provided medical support for the nurses. JJVMcM and CEM supervised the study. CER and IF helped organise data collection and set up the study database. CER, JN, and IF carried out the statistical analysis. All investigators were involved in writing the study report. JJVMcM is the guarantor.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: This study was supported by a grant from the Scottish Office, Department of Health.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
McMurray JJ, Stewart S.
Epidemiology, aetiology, and prognosis of heart failure.
Heart
2000;
83:
596-602 |
| 2. | Stewart S, MacIntyre K, Hole DJ, Capewell S, McMurray JJ. More `malignant' than cancer? Five-year survival following a first admission for heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 2001; 3: 315-322[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 3. | Ashton CM. Care of patients with failing hearts: evidence for failures in clinical practice and health services research J Gen Intern Med 1999; 14: 138-140[Medline]. |
| 4. |
Chin MH, Goldman L.
Factors contributing to the hospitalization of patients with congestive heart failure.
Am J Public Health
1997;
87:
643-648 |
| 5. |
McMurray JJ, Stewart S.
Nurse led, multidisciplinary intervention in chronic heart failure.
Heart
1998;
80:
430-431 |
| 6. | Stewart S, Blue L, eds. Improving outcomes in chronic heart failure: a practical guide to specialist nurse intervention. London: BMJ, 2001. |
| 7. |
Cline CMJ, Israelsson BYA, Willenheimer RB, Broms K, Erhardt LR.
Cost effective management programme for heart failure reduces hospitalisation.
Heart
1998;
80:
442-446 |
| 8. |
Rich MW, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, Leven CL, Freedland KE, Carney RM.
A multidisciplinary intervention to prevent the readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure.
N Engl J Med
1995;
333:
1190-1195 |
| 9. | Stewart S, Marley JE, Horowitz JD. Effects of a multidisciplinary, home-based intervention on unplanned readmissions and survival among patients with chronic congestive heart failure: a randomised controlled study. Lancet 1999; 354: 1077-1083[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 10. |
Packer M, Poole-Wilson PA, Armstrong PW, Cleland JG, Horowitz JD, Massie BM, et al.
Circulation
1999;
100:
2312-2318 |
(Accepted 10 July 2001)
Read all Rapid Responses