Dataset Information

Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Compare outcomes in patients with suspected heart failure (HF) and raised natriuretic peptides who are reviewed in a specialist HF clinic in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines (compliant group) versus patients who are not reviewed in the clinic (non-compliant group). DESIGN:Retrospective observational study. SETTING:Single large UK district general hospital. PARTICIPANTS:567 consecutive patients in primary care with raised N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) levels (>400?pg/mL) from February to September 2014. INTERVENTIONS:161 (28%) patients were referred to the specialist HF clinic and 406 (72%) were not. Outcomes were compared between the two groups. OUTCOME MEASURES:All-cause and cardiovascular (CV) hospitalisations and all-cause mortality. RESULTS:The compliant group were slightly younger than the non-compliant group (78±9 vs 80±9; p=0.019) but had much higher NT-pro-BNP (3108±4526 vs 2271±3637?pg/mL; p<0.0001). Despite this, over a mean follow-up period of 9±2 months, rates of all-cause hospitalisation (24% vs 44%; p<0.0001) and CV hospitalisation (3% vs 15%,?p<0.0001) were significantly lower in the compliant group versus the non-compliant group, respectively. There was no significant difference in mortality rates (6% compliant group vs 8% non-compliant group; p=0.487). CONCLUSIONS:Hospitalisation rates in patients with suspected HF and raised NT-pro-BNP were extremely high over a relatively short follow-up period. Patients reviewed in a specialist HF clinic had much higher NT-pro-BNP levels, suggesting they were at higher risk of adverse outcomes, yet also had significantly lower rates of all-cause and CV hospitalisation. Our findings support implementation of the relevant NICE guidelines for patients with suspected HF.

SUBMITTER: Morton G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6112396 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

Morton Geraint G Philip Legate L Gilpin Thomas T Chan Pik Ee PE Guha Kaushik K Kalra Paul R PR

BMJ open 20180823 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>Compare outcomes in patients with suspected heart failure (HF) and raised natriuretic peptides who are reviewed in a specialist HF clinic in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines (compliant group) versus patients who are not reviewed in the clinic (non-compliant group).<h4>Design</h4>Retrospective observational study.<h4>Setting</h4>Single large UK district general hospital.<h4>Participants</h4>567 consecutive patients in primary care wi ...[more]

PMID: 30139902

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUpdating is important to ensure clinical guideline (CG) recommendations remain valid. However, little research has been undertaken in this field. We assessed CGs produced by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to identify and describe updated recommendations and to investigate potential factors associated with updating. Also, we evaluated the reporting and presentation of recommendation changes.MethodsWe performed a descriptive analysis of original and updated CGs and recommendations, and an assessment of presentation formats and methods for recording information. We conducted a case-control study, defining cases as original recommendations that were updated ('new-replaced' recommendations), and controls as original recommendations that were considered to remain valid ('not changed' recommendations). We performed a comparison of main characteristics between cases and controls, and we planned a multiple regression analysis to identify potential predictive factors for updating.ResultsWe included nine updated CGs (1,306 recommendations) and their corresponding original versions (1,106 recommendations). Updated CGs included 812 (62%) recommendations 'not reviewed', 368 (28.1%) 'new' recommendations, 104 (7.9%) 'amended' recommendations, and 25 (1.9%) recommendations reviewed but unchanged. The presentation formats used to indicate the changes in recommendations varied widely across CGs. Changes in 'amended', 'deleted', and 'new-replaced' recommendations (n = 296) were reported infrequently, mostly in appendices. These changes were recorded in 167 (56.4%) recommendations; and were explained in 81 (27.4%) recommendations. We retrieved a total of 7.1% (n = 78) case recommendations ('new-replaced') and 2.4% (n = 27) control recommendations ('not changed') in original CGs. The updates were mainly from 'Fertility CG', about 'gynaecology, pregnancy and birth' topic, and 'treatment' or 'prevention' purposes. We did not perform the multiple regression analysis as originally planned due to the small sample of recommendations retrieved.ConclusionOur study is the first to describe and assess updated CGs and recommendations from a national guideline program. Our results highlight the pressing need to standardise the reporting and presentation of updated recommendations and the research gap about the optimal way to present updates to guideline users. Furthermore, there is a need to investigate updating predictive factors.

Project description:Surgical tumour removal remains the preferred treatment for most patients with renal cell carcinoma, and many medical associations have proposed guidelines for the optimal surveillance of patients following surgery. This study evaluated the adherence of Canadian urologists to the follow-up guidelines proposed by the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) in 2009.The study cohort was identified from the Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System, a prospectively populated database from 15 academic institutions in 6 Canadian provinces: British Colombia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. A total of 1982 patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy for stage pT1-3N0M0 renal cancer between January 2011 and June 2016 were included in the cohort. Numbers of abdominal and chest imaging tests performed during the follow-up period were captured and compared with the 2009 CUA guidelines. The level of compliance was measured by means of weighted ? and Pearson correlation statistics. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with noncompliance (under- or overtesting) in the postoperative surveillance period.Of the 1982 patients, 1380 had stage pT1 disease, 164 had stage pT2 disease, and 438 had stage pT3 disease. There was incongruent adherence to the CUA surveillance guidelines, with a ratio of observed to recommended tests of 0.71 and 2.27 for chest and abdominal imaging, respectively. Overall, moderate correlation between observed and recommended tests was observed, with the highest value found for abdominal imaging in the pT3 group (? = 0.59 [95% confidence interval 0.52-0.66]). Patients who underwent radical nephrectomy and those who presented with a higher stage of the disease were less likely to receive fewer chest imaging tests than recommended, and those with stage pT2 disease, those with stage pT3 disease, those with conventional clear cell renal cell carcinoma and those with a low-risk histologic type had an increased risk of undertesting.In the 6 Canadian provinces, there are large differences between guidelines and clinical practice in imaging surveillance after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Better adherence to clinical guidelines could improve optimization of health care services.

Project description:BackgroundMedicines reconciliation-identifying and maintaining an accurate list of a patient's current medications-should be undertaken at all transitions of care and available to all patients.ObjectiveA self-completion web survey was conducted for chief pharmacists (or equivalent) to evaluate medicines reconciliation levels in secondary care mental health organisations.SettingThe survey was sent to secondary care mental health organisations in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.MethodThe survey was launched via Bristol Online Surveys. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data was collected through respondents free-text answers to specific questions.Main outcomes measureInvestigate how medicines reconciliation is delivered, incorporate a clear description of the role of pharmacy staff and identify areas of concern.ResultsForty-two (52 % response rate) surveys were completed. Thirty-seven (88.1 %) organisations have a formal policy for medicines reconciliation with defined steps. Results show that the pharmacy team (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) are the main professionals involved in medicines reconciliation with a high rate of doctors also involved. Training procedures frequently include an induction by pharmacy for doctors whilst the pharmacy team are generally trained by another member of pharmacy. Mental health organisations estimate that nearly 80 % of medicines reconciliation is carried out within 24 h of admission. A full medicines reconciliation is not carried out on patient transfer between mental health wards; instead quicker and less exhaustive variations are implemented. 71.4 % of organisations estimate that pharmacy staff conduct daily medicine reconciliations for acute admission wards (Monday to Friday). However, only 38 % of organisations self-report to pharmacy reconciling patients' medication for other teams that admit from primary care.ConclusionMost mental health organisations appear to be complying with NICE guidance on medicines reconciliation for their acute admission wards. However, medicines reconciliation is conducted less frequently on other units that admit from primary care and rarely completed on transfer when it significantly differs to that on admission. Formal training and competency assessments on medicines reconciliation should be considered as current training varies and adherence to best practice is questionable.

Dataset Information

Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

Publications

Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets