Skip Navigation

European Journal of Heart Failure 2005 7(5):921-926; doi:10.1016/j.ejheart.2005.05.009
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ojeda, S.
Right arrow Articles by Velasco, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ojeda, S.
Right arrow Articles by Velasco, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2005 European Society of Cardiology

Short- and long-term results of a programme for the prevention of readmissions and mortality in patients with heart failure: Are effects maintained after stopping the programme?

Soledad Ojedaa,*, Manuel Anguitaa, Mónica Delgadoa, Felipe Atienzab, Carmen Rusa, Amador L. Granadosa, Federico Ridoccib, Federico Vallésa and Jose A. Velascob

a Department of Cardiology Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain
b Department of Cardiology Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

* Corresponding author. La Bodega street, 2 5°-8, 14008 Córdoba, Spain. E-mial address: sojeda{at}supercable.es


   Abstract

The objective of the study was to evaluate whether improvements obtained during an intervention programme were maintained after the programme was stopped. 153 patients discharged with a diagnosis of heart failure (HF) were randomized to either usual care or an intervention programme, which included patient education, consultation with the cardiologist and monitoring in the Heart Failure Unit. After an average period of 16±8 months, the intervention programme was stopped. One year later, all the patients were re-examined to assess HF readmissions, all-cause mortality, quality of life, and prescribed medical treatment. During the 16±8-month treatment period, patients in the intervention group had a lower rate of HF readmissions (17% vs. 51%, p<0.01), less all-cause mortality (13% vs. 27%, p=0.03), improvement in quality of life (1.5±0.8 vs. 1.9±1, p=0.03) and optimisation of medical treatment was achieved. One year after stopping the intervention, there was no difference in HF readmissions (28% vs. 25%, p=0.72), all-cause mortality (14% vs. 17%, p=0.64) and quality of life (1.7±0.9 vs. 1.8±1, p=0.24) between the groups. Survival and the probability of not being readmitted due to HF were similar in both groups. There was also a reduction in the use of beta-blockers and spironolactone in the intervention group.

Conclusions: The positive effects of an intervention programme are clearly reduced when it is stopped, due to less strict control of the patients and a decrease in the use of drugs with proven efficacy in HF.

Key Words: Heart failure • Management programme

Received July 8, 2004; Revised October 13, 2004; Accepted May 19, 2005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Circ Heart FailHome page
E. A. Bocchi, F. Cruz, G. Guimaraes, L. F. Pinho Moreira, V. S. Issa, S. M. Ayub Ferreira, P. R. Chizzola, G. E. C. Souza, S. Brandao, and F. Bacal
Long-Term Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study Using Repetitive Education at Six-Month Intervals and Monitoring for Adherence in Heart Failure Outpatients: The REMADHE Trial
Circ Heart Fail, July 1, 2008; 1(2): 115 - 124.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
S. C. Inglis, S. Pearson, S. Treen, T. Gallasch, J. D. Horowitz, and S. Stewart
Extending the Horizon in Chronic Heart Failure: Effects of Multidisciplinary, Home-Based Intervention Relative to Usual Care
Circulation, December 5, 2006; 114(23): 2466 - 2473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.