Search

Hospital at home (HaH) is an innovative care model that may be particularly suited for heart failure (HF). Outpatient visits and inpatient care have been the 2 traditional settings for HF care, yet may not match the social and medical needs of patients at all times. Alternative models such as HaH may represent an effective and patient-centered option for select patients with worsening HF. To date, limited research in HF and other disease states has supported HaH as being safe and lower cost than traditional inpatient admission. Supporting HaH are new payment structures, such as Medicare's Acute Hospital Care at Home waiver program. In combination with outpatient visits, outpatient intravenous diuretic clinics, inpatient care, and cardiac intensive care, HaH could be a core component of a comprehensive care model with the potential to match resource utilization with the needs of patients across the spectrum of HF severity, and improve patient outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Fonarow reports consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. Dr Butler serves as a consultant for Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, American Regent, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, Roche, and Vifor. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association (No. 929502), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, scPharmaceuticals, and Sanofi; serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Lexicon, Lilly, Merck, PharmaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and Roche Diagnostics. All other authors report no disclosures.

Objectives: This study sought to describe the health status of outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) by sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES)., Background: Although a primary goal in treating patients with HFrEF is to optimize health status, whether disparities by sex, race/ethnicity, and SES exist is unknown., Methods: In the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry, the associations among sex, race, and SES and health status, as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-overall summary (KCCQ-os) score (range 0 to 100; higher scores indicate better health status) was compared among 3,494 patients from 140 U.S. clinics. SES was categorized by total household income. Hierarchical multivariate linear regression estimated differences in KCCQ-os score after adjusting for 31 patient characteristics and 10 medications., Results: Overall mean KCCQ-os scores were 64.2 ± 24.0 but lower for women (29% of sample; 60.3 ± 24.0 vs. 65.9 ± 24.0, respectively; p < 0.001), for blacks (60.5 ± 25.0 vs. 64.9 ± 23.0, respectively; p < 0.001), for Hispanics (59.1 ± 21.0 vs. 64.9 ± 23.0, respectively; p < 0.001), and for those with the lowest income (<$25,000; mean: 57.1 vs. 63.1 to 74.7 for other income categories; p < 0.001). Fully adjusted KCCQ-os scores were 2.2 points lower for women (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.8 to -0.6; p = 0.007), no different for blacks (p = 0.74), 4.0 points lower for Hispanics (95% CI: -6.6 to -1.3; p = 0.003), and lowest in the poorest patients (4.7 points lower than those with the highest income (95% CI: 0.1 to 9.2; p = 0.045; p for trend = 0.003)., Conclusions: Among outpatients with HFrEF, women, blacks, Hispanics, and poorer patients had worse health status, which remained significant for women, Hispanics, and poorer patients in fully adjusted analyses. This suggests an opportunity to further optimize treatment to reduce these observed disparities., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although a key treatment goal for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is to optimize their health status (their symptoms, function, and quality of life), the variability across outpatient practices in achieving this goal is unknown., Methods and Results: In the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry, associations between baseline practice characteristics and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) Overall Summary (OS) and Symptom Frequency (SF) scores were assessed in 3494 patients across 140 US practices using hierarchical regression after accounting for 23 patient and 11 treatment characteristics. We then calculated an adjusted median odds ratio to quantify the average difference in likelihood that a patient would have excellent (KCCQ-OS, ≥75) health status or minimal (monthly or fewer) symptoms (KCCQ-SF, ≥75) when treated at one practice versus another, at random. The mean (±SD) KCCQ-OS and KCCQ-SF were 64.2±24 and 68.9±25.6, with 40% (n=1380) and 50% (n=1760) having KCCQ scores ≥75, respectively. The adjusted median odds ratio across practices, for KCCQ-OS ≥75, was 1.70 (95% confidence interval, 1.54-1.99; P <0.001) indicating a median 70% higher odds of a patient having good-to-excellent health status when treated at one random practice versus another. In regard to KCCQ-SF, the adjusted median odds ratio for KCCQ-SF ≥75 was 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.41-1.76; P =0.001)., Conclusions: In a large, contemporary registry of outpatients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, we observed significant practice-level variability in patients' health status. Quantifying patients' health status as a measure of quality should be explored as a foundation for improving care., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.centerwatch.com. Unique identifier: TX144901., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: After left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement for advanced heart failure, increased cerebral perfusion should result in improved cognitive function. However, stroke (a well-known LVAD complication) and subclinical cerebral ischemia may result in transient or permanent cognitive decline. We sought to describe the incidence and predictors of cognitive decline after LVAD using a valid, sensitive assessment tool., Methods and Results: Among 4419 patients in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support who underwent LVAD implantation between May 2012 and December 2013, cognitive function was assessed in 1173 patients with the Trail Making B Test before LVAD and at 3, 6, and 12 months. The test detects several forms of cognitive impairment, including subclinical stroke. Cognitive decline was defined as a clinically important increase during follow-up using a moderate Cohen d effect size of 0.5×baseline SD (32 s). The cumulative incidence of cognitive decline in the year after LVAD implantation, treating death and transplantation as competing risks, was 29.2%. In adjusted analysis, older age (≥70 versus <50 years; hazard ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval 1.46-3.44; P(trend)<0.001) and destination therapy (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.92) were significantly associated with greater risk of cognitive decline., Conclusions: Cognitive decline occurs commonly in patients in the year after LVAD and is associated with older age and destination therapy. These results could have important implications for patient selection and improved communication of risks before LVAD implantation. Additional studies are needed to explore the association between cognitive decline and subsequent stroke, health status, and mortality in patients after LVAD., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)