# |
1st Author/Year |
Level of Research (or Non-Research) Evidence |
Sample Composition and Intervention |
Results or Recommendations |
Strengths or Limitations |
Rating |
Strength |
Quality |
1 |
GESICA Investigator8 (2005) |
RCT, multicenter |
1518 Argentinean patients with HF.Patients with HF to either routine care or an intervention consisting of an explanatory booklet plus periodic telephone contact by specialized nurse over 1 year. |
The intervention resulted in 29% readmissions for HF. Mortality was similar in both groups. The intervention group had a better quality of life than the usual care group (P = 0.001). |
Strengths: large sample size and multicenter trials |
I |
A |
2 |
Jaarsma et al9 (2008) |
RCT, multicenter |
1023 Dutch HF patients were assigned to 3 groups: control group (follow-up by a cardiologist), additional basic support by a nurse, intensive support by a nurse |
During the 18 months of follow up, HF hospitalization 42% in the control group, 41% in the basic support group, and 38% in the intensive support group. The both intervention groups potentially clinically relevant 15% decrease in all-cause mortality and shorter hospitalization. |
Strengths: large sample size.The control group patients were seen by a cardiologist, which is standard care in Netherlands. Therefore, the control group was led to better medication adherence and outcomes. |
I |
A |
3 |
Riegel et al10 (2002) |
RCT |
Patients were assigned to receive 6 months of nurse case management telephone intervention (n = 130) or usual care (n = 228). |
The HF hospitalization rate was 45.7% lower in the intervention group at 3 months (P = 0.03) and 47.8% lower at 6 months (P = 0.01). HF hospital days, multiple readmissions, and inpatient HF costs were lower at 6 months compared to usual care. |
Strength: The study has clear and statistically significant results.Limitation: Intensity of the intervention and patient characteristics, such as illness severity, are unclear. |
I |
A |
4 |
Ducharme et al11 (2005) |
RCT |
230 HF patients were assigned to standard care (n = 115) or follow-up at a multidisciplinary specialized HF outpatient clinic (n = 115). |
The intervention group had fewer readmissions to hospital and shorter hospital stays than patients in the control group at 6 months. Quality of life was improved in the intervention. No difference in mortality was observed. |
Limitation: The less intense follow-up of the control group may have led to an ascertainment bias. |
I |
A |
5 |
Stromberg et al12 (2003) |
RCT |
106 HF patients were assigned to either follow-up at a nurse-led HF clinic or to usual care. Specially educated and experienced cardiac nurse delegated the responsibility for making protocol-led changes in medications and gave education and social support to patients and family. |
The intervention group had fewer admissions and days in hospital at 3 months and 12 months compared to the control group. Also, the intervention group had significantly higher self-care scores than the control group. |
Strength: study was conducted at 3 centers.Limitation: small sample sizes |
I |
A |
6 |
Yu et al13 (2006) |
Systematic Review |
21 RCTs on DMPs Studies needed to involve patients with HF but not mixed samples and include hospital readmission/mortality as outcome variables.Mean age over 60 yearsDetailed description of the DMP |
Effective DMP should be multi-faceted and consist of an in-hospital phase of care, intensive patient education, self-care supportive strategy, optimization of medical regimen, and ongoing surveillance and management of clinical deterioration. |
Strength: identify crucial characteristics of successful DMPs by comparing the content of the effective programs with that of ineffective ones.Limitation: variable clinical setting/location and intervention. |
I |
A |
7 |
Willey RM14 (2012) |
Systematic Review |
19 studies resulted in 12 RCTs, 3 systematic reviews, 2 meta-analyses, 1 meta-regression analysis, and 1 literature review. |
Level 1 evidence demonstrated positive benefits from HFDM programs, structured telephone support, and telemonitoring interventions as an effective component of contemporary multidisciplinary HF management. |
Strength: critical demonstration of positive benefits from HF management intervention |
I |
A |
8 |
McAlister et al15 (2004) |
Systematic Review |
29 RCTs of multidisciplinary management strategies for patient with HF |
Multidisciplinary management strategies for patients with HF reveal 27% reduction in HF hospitalization rate and 43% reduction in total number of HF hospitalization. Also reduces all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization. |
Limitation: The trials were relatively short and lack direct comparison of each study. |
I |
A |
9 |
Case et al16 (2010) |
Systematic Review |
6 studies regarding HF management program |
Patients in all of the studies had decreased readmission rates when they participated in a specialized HF management program by APRN. |
Limitation: The frequency and interventions among studies are different. |
I |
B |
10 |
Inglis et al17 (2010) |
Systematic Review |
25 full peer-reviewed studies |
Structured telephone support and tele-monitoring are effective in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality and CHF-related hospitalizations in patients with CHF |
Limitation: Trials included small samples and low to moderate quality. |
I |
B |
11 |
Chaudhry et al18 (2010) |
RCT |
1653 patients hospitalized for HF to undergo either telemonitoring (826 patients) or usual care (827 patients). |
There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to the secondary endpoints or the time to the primary endpoint or its components. |
Limitation: 21% of patients did not complete the final telephone interview. |
I |
A |
12 |
Koehler et al19 (2010) |
RCT |
710 HF patients at 165 sites in Germany were assigned to an intervention group of daily remote device monitoring (ECG, BP, weight) coupled with medical telephone support or to usual care. |
There were no differences in mortality (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67–1.41) or in the secondary endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67- 1.19). |
Strengths: large sample size and multi-center study |
I |
B |
13 |
Ditewig et al21 (2010) |
Systematic Review |
19 RCT studies |
Self-management has positive effect, although not always significant, on reduced numbers of all-cause hospital readmission, decreased mortality, and increased quality of life. |
Limitations: lack of blinding with biased estimates of intervention and overestimated effects in trials |
I |
B |
14 |
Hernandez et al22 (2010) |
Observational Study |
30,136 patients 65 or older with HF from 225 hospitals |
In the lowest quartile of early post-discharge follow-up, patients with HF had a 3% higher readmission rate than the other 75% of hospital. |
Limitation: analysis was restricted to fee-for-service |
II |
A |
15 |
Ezekowitz et al23 (2005) |
Observational Study |
3136 patients with a new diagnosis of CHF |
Patient with CHF followed by both specialists and FPs had significantly better readmission, survival than those followed by FPs alone. |
Limitations: lack of information on functional status and severity of CHF and unmeasured confounders |
II |
B |
16 |
Koelling et al24 (2005) |
RCT |
223 systolic HF patients were assigned to an intervention group consisted of 1-hour 1-on-1 teaching session with a nurse educator and the standard discharge. |
180 days after discharge, patients in the intervention group had fewer days hospitalized or were dead and had a low risk of readmission or death (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45- 0.93) compared to standard discharge. Also, costs of care were lower in patients receiving the intervention than in control group by $2823 per patient. |
Limitations: lack of the generalizability of the results, unclear duration of the effect of the education program, and absence of blinding of the nurse coordinator to the treatment assignment of the patients |
I |
A |
17 |
Naylor et al25 (2004) |
RCT |
239 patients age 65 and older hospitalized with HF |
A comprehensive transitional care intervention for elders hospitalized with HF increased length of time between hospital discharge and readmission or death, reduced total number of rehospitalizations, and decreased health care costs. |
Limitations: limited in acute episode of illness and probable selection bias of participants |
I |
A |
18 |
Stauffer et al26 (2011) |
Observational Study |
Patients with HF who were 65 or older and were discharged from BMCG from 08/24/2009 through 04/30/2010 |
The intervention (APN-led transitional program) significantly reduced adjusted 30-day readmission rates by 48% during the post intervention period. The intervention had little effect on length of stay or total 60-day direct costs. |
Limitation: potentially unobserved differences in the study population at BMCG compared with various hospitals within the BHCS |
II |
A |
19 |
Ballard et al27 (2010) |
Quasi-experimentalStudy |
2633 patients with HF discharged from 10 BHCS hospitals between 12/2007 and 03/2009 |
Standardized HF order set use significantly increased core measures compliance (OR = 1.51), reduced inpatient mortality and 30-day readmission and mortality rates, and lowered direct cost for initial admission. |
Limitation: selection bias leads to overestimation of the intervention's effort |
II |
A |
Comments