Innovation in Ambulatory Care of Heart Failure in the Era of Coronavirus Disease 2019.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Leiva O
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7303658 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Innovation in Ambulatory Care of Heart Failure in the Era of Coronavirus Disease 2019.
Leiva Orly O Bhatt Ankeet S AS Vaduganathan Muthiah M
Heart failure clinics 20200619 4
Despite steady progress over the past 3 decades in advancing drug and device therapies to reduce morbidity and mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, large registries of usual care demonstrate incomplete use of these evidence-based therapies in clinical practice. Potential strategies to improve guideline-directed medical therapy include leveraging non-physician clinicians, solidifying transitions of care, incorporating telehealth solutions, and engaging in comprehensive comor ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a debilitating viral infection and, to date, 628,903 people have died from it, numbers that cannot yet be compared to the 50 million who died in the 1918 flu pandemic. As COVID-19 became better understood, cardiovascular manifestations associated with it were identified. This led to a complete healthcare restructuring with virtual clinics and changes to the triaging of critically ill patients. There are a lot of questions over how COVID-19 affects patients with heart failure (HF) as this condition is a leading cause of cardiovascular death. This review describes the cardiovascular implications of COVID-19 and new practices surrounding the use of telehealth to follow up and triage patients with HF. Current practices supported by medical societies, the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and, finally, a brief note regarding the management of advanced HF patients will also be discussed.
| S-EPMC7479531 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe sought to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Tele-HF Clinic (Tele-HFC) program on cardiovascular death, heart failure (HF) rehospitalization, and heart transplantation rates in a cohort of ambulatory HF patients during and after the peak of the pandemic.MethodsUsing the HF clinic database, we compared data of patients with HF before, during, and after the peak of the pandemic (January 1 to March 17 [pre-COVID], March 17 to May 31 [peak-COVID], and June 1 to October 1 [post-COVID]). During peak-COVID, all patients were managed by Tele-HFC or hospitalization. After June 1, patients chose either a face-to-face clinic visit or a continuous tele-clinic visit.ResultsCardiovascular death and medical titration rates were similar in peak-COVID compared with all other periods. HF readmission rates were significantly lower in peak-COVID (8.7% vs. 2.5%, p<0.001) and slightly increased (3.5%) post-COVID. Heart transplant rates were substantially increased in post-COVID (4.5% vs. peak-COVID [0%], p = 0.002). After June 1, 38% of patients continued with the Tele-HFC program. Patients managed by the Tele-HFC program for <6 months were less likely to have HF with reduced ejection fraction (73% vs. 54%, p = 0.005) and stage-D HF (33% vs. 14%, p = 0.001), and more likely to achieve the target neurohormonal blockade dose (p<0.01), compared with the ≥6-month Tele-HFC group.ConclusionsHF rehospitalization and transplant rates significantly declined during the pandemic in ambulatory care of HF. However, reduction in these rates did not affect subsequent 5-month hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality in the setting of Tele-HFC program and continuum of advanced HF therapies.
| S-EPMC7987182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeart failure (HF) patients with CRT devices are a vulnerable patient population during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic. It is important to develop innovative virtual care models to deliver multidisciplinary care while minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV2 exposure.ObjectiveWe aim to provide a description of how HF patients with CRT devices were assessed and managed in our virtual multidisciplinary clinic during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Clinical outcomes between this group of patients seen in virtual clinic and a historical cohort followed by in-person multi-disciplinary clinic prior to the pandemic were compared.MethodThis is a retrospective cohort study of HF patients with CRT implants who were seen in the virtual multidisciplinary clinic from March 18th, 2020 to May 27th, 2020 (Virtual Visit Group, N = 43). A historical cohort of HF patients with CRT devices seen in the ReACT clinic in person during the same calendar time period in 2019 was used as a control group (In-Person Visit Group, N = 39). Both groups were followed until July 1st of the same calendar year (2020 or 2019) for clinical events. The primary outcome measure was a combined outcome of all-cause mortality and HF- or device-related hospitalizations during follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included patient satisfaction, COVID-19 infection, and other cardiovascular events.ResultsIn the Virtual-Visit Group, 21 patients (48.8%) had their initial ReACT clinic visit (first visit after CRT implant) as a virtual visit; 22 patients (51.2%) had prior in-person ReACT clinic visits before the first virtual visit. During the virtual visits, 12 patients had either potential cardiac symptoms or significant device interrogation findings that required clinical intervention. In post-virtual clinic patient satisfaction survey, all 22 patients surveyed (100%) reported being very satisfied or satisfied with the overall experience of the virtual clinic, and every patient (100%) said they would like to use telemedicine again. During a median follow-up period of 82 days (interquartile range [IQR] 61-96 days), one patient died from pneumonia of unclear etiology at an outside hospital, without documentation of COVID-19 positivity. No patient was hospitalized for HF- or arrhythmia-related complications. No patient was diagnosed with COVID-19. Compared with the In-Person Visit Group, there was no significant increase in mortality or major cardiovascular events in the Virtual-Visit Group (2.3% versus 5.1%, P = 0.60).Conclusions and relevanceVirtual multidisciplinary care was feasible for HF patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices and achieved good patient satisfaction. Virtual care was not associated with short-term increase in adverse events for HF patients with CRT device during the COVID-19 Pandemic. This virtual care model could help promote the adoption of digital health methodology for high-risk patients with multiple cardiac comorbidities.
| S-EPMC8165087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsPre-existing cardiovascular disease in general and related risk factors have been associated with poor coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. However, data on outcomes of COVID-19 among people with pre-existing diagnosis of heart failure (HF) have not been studied in sufficient detail. We aimed to perform detailed characterization of the association of pre-existing HF with COVID-19 outcomes.Methods and resultsA retrospective cohort study based on Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data comparing 30 day mortality and hospital admission rates after COVID-19 diagnosis among Veterans with and without pre-existing diagnosis of HF. Cox-regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) with adjustment for covariates. Among 31 051 veterans (97% male) with COVID-19, 6148 had pre-existing diagnosis of HF. The mean (SD) age of patients with HF was 70 (13) whereas the mean (SD) age of patients without HF was 57 (17). Within the HF group with available data on left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), 1844 patients (63.4%) had an EF of >45%, and 1063 patients (36.6%) had an EF of ≤45%. Patients in the HF cohort had higher 30 day mortality (5.4% vs. 1.5%) and admission (18.5% vs. 8.4%) rates after diagnosis of COVID-19. After adjustment for age, sex, and race, HRs (95% CIs) for 30 day mortality and for 30 day hospital admissions were 1.87 (1.61-2.17) and 1.79 (1.66-1.93), respectively. After additional adjustment for medical comorbidities, HRs for 30 day mortality and for 30 day hospital admissions were 1.37 (1.15-1.64) and 1.27 (1.16-1.38), respectively. The findings were similar among HF patients with preserved vs. reduced EF, among those taking vs. not taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and among those taking vs. not taking anticoagulants.ConclusionsPatients with COVID-19 and pre-existing diagnosis of HF had a higher risk of 30 day mortality and hospital admissions compared to those without history of HF. The findings were similar by EF categories and by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors or anticoagulant use.
| S-EPMC8120381 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A 67-year-old man with a prior heart failure presented with fever, cough and dyspnea for 4 days. Physical examination showed bilateral rales on the lung exam, yet no lower extremity edema. The combination of symptoms, elevated inflammatory markers, normal baseline pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, PaO2/FiO2 < 300 and positive swab suggested coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) rather than heart failure exacerbation. We discuss the challenges in management of ARDS in COVID-19 patients that may initially mimic as acute exacerbation of heart failure.
| S-EPMC7239589 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough cardiovascular comorbidities seem to be strongly associated with worse outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), data regarding patients with preexisting heart failure are limited.AimsTo investigate the incidence, characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 with a history of heart failure with preserved or reduced ejection fraction.MethodsWe performed an observational multicentre study including all patients hospitalized for COVID-19 across 24 centres in France from 26 February to 20 April 2020. The primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital death or need for orotracheal intubation.ResultsOverall, 2809 patients (mean age 66.4±16.9years) were included. Three hundred and seventeen patients (11.2%) had a history of heart failure; among them, 49.2% had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and 50.8% had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. COVID-19 severity at admission, defined by a quick sequential organ failure assessment score>1, was similar in patients with versus without a history of heart failure. Before and after adjustment for age, male sex, cardiovascular comorbidities and quick sequential organ failure assessment score, history of heart failure was associated with the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.90; P=0.02). This result seemed to be mainly driven by a history of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.13-2.27; P=0.01) rather than heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.79-1.81; P=0.41).ConclusionsHistory of heart failure in patients with COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death or orotracheal intubation. These findings suggest that patients with a history of heart failure, particularly heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, should be considered at high risk of clinical deterioration.
| S-EPMC8141712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsCardiovascular co-morbidities like congestive heart failure (CHF) alter the course of coronavirus disease 2019. Factors associated with the outbreak and lockdown can exacerbate CHF.Methods and resultsWe analysed the answers of 124 randomly selected CHF outpatients (mean age 71.0 ± 14.0 years, 60.5% male) interviewed by phone during the sixth and seventh weeks of the lockdown. Most patients were treated for New York Heart Association class II (38.7%) and reduced ejection fraction HF (70.2%). Psychological distress (Kessler 6 score ≥ 5) was common (18.5%), and 21.8% felt worse than before the lockdown. Few patients (n = 10) adjusted their intake of HF medications, always on medical prescription. Decreased physical activity was common (41.9%) and more frequent in women (P = 0.025) and urban dwellers (P = 0.009). Almost half of respondents (46.0%) declared increased screen time, but only few declared more alcohol intake (4.0%). Weight gain was common (27.4%), and 44.4% of current smokers increased tobacco consumption. Adherence to recommended salt or fluid intake restrictions was reduced in 14.5%. Increase in HF symptoms was commonly reported (21.8%) and tended to be higher in women than in men (P = 0.074). Of the 23 patients who had a phone teleconsultation during the pandemic, 16 had initially planned an in-person consultation that they switched for teleconsultation.ConclusionsDuring the lockdown, psychological distress and decreased well-being were common in CHF outpatients, and there was an increase in unhealthy lifestyle behaviours. These changes may negatively impact short-term and long-term prognoses. Medication adherence was maintained, and limitations in access to care were partly counterbalanced by use of telehealth.
| S-EPMC7537025 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare acute care virtual visits with in-person visits with respect to equity of access, markers of quality and safety, and parent and provider experience, before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.Study designWe compared patient demographics, antimicrobial prescribing rates, emergency department (ED) use, and patient-experience scores for virtual visits and in-person care at 2 academic pediatric primary care practices using χ2 testing and interrupted time series analyses. Parent and provider focus groups explored themes related to virtual visit experience and acceptability.ResultsWe compared virtual acute care visits conducted in March 2020-February 2021 (n = 8868) with in-person acute care visits conducted in February 2019-March 2020 (n = 24 120) and March 2020-February 2021 (n = 6054). There were small differences in patient race/ethnicity across the different cohorts (P < .01). Virtual visits were associated with a 9.6% (-11.5%, -7.8%, P < .001) decrease in all antibiotic prescribing and a 13.2% (-22.1%, -4.4%, P < .01) decrease in antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections. Unanticipated visits to the ED did not significantly differ among visit types. Patient experience scores were significantly greater (P < .05) for virtual acute care in overall rating of care and likelihood to recommend. Focus group themes included safety, distractibility, convenience, treatment, and technology. Providers were broadly accepting of virtual care while parental views were more mixed.ConclusionsTelehealth acute care visits may not have negative effects on quality and safety, as measured by antimicrobial prescribing and unanticipated ED visit rates. Efforts to increase parental acceptance and avoid creating disparities in access to virtual care will be essential to continued success of telehealth acute care visits.
| S-EPMC9650264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeart failure (HF) affects over 26 million people worldwide. Multidisciplinary management strategies that include symptom monitoring and patient self-care support reduce HF hospitalization and mortality rates. Ideally, HF follow-up and self-care support includes lifestyle-change recommendations and remote monitoring of weight and HF symptoms. Providing these via a digital solution may be ideal for improving HF disease outcomes and reducing the burden on providers and healthcare systems. This study's main objective was to assess the feasibility of a digital solution including remote monitoring, lifestyle-change, and self-care support for HF outpatients in Iceland.MethodsTwenty HF patients (mean age 57.5 years, 80% males) participated in an 8-week study. They were provided with a digital solution (SK-141), including lifestyle-change and disease self-care support, a remote symptom monitoring system, and a secure messaging platform between healthcare providers and patients. This feasibility study aimed to assess patient acceptability of this new intervention, retention rate, and to evaluate trends in clinical outcomes. To assess the acceptability of SK-141, participants completed a questionnaire about their experience after the 8-week study. Participants performed daily assigned activities (missions), including self-reporting symptoms. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire at the study's beginning and end with an online survey.ResultsOf the 24 patients invited, 20 were elected to participate. The retention rate of participants throughout the 8-week period was high (80%). At the end of the 8 weeks, thirteen participants completed a questionnaire about their experience and acceptability of the SK-141. They rated their experience positively including on questions whether they would recommend the solution to others (6.8 on a scale of 1-7), whether the solution had improved their life and well-being (5.7 on a scale of 1-7), and whether it was user friendly (5.5 on a scale of 1-7). Many of the clinical parameters studied exhibited a promising trend towards improvement over the 8-week period.ConclusionThe digital solution, SK-141, was very acceptable to patients and also showed promising clinical results in this small feasibility study. These results encourage us to conduct a longer, more extensive, adequately powered, randomized-controlled study to assess whether this digital solution can improve the quality of life and clinical outcomes among HF patients.
| S-EPMC9709356 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This joint Canadian Heart Failure Society and the CCS Heart Failure guidelines report has been developed to provide a pan-Canadian snapshot of the current state of clinic-based ambulatory heart failure (HF) care in Canada with specific reference to elements and processes of care associated with quality and high performing health systems. It includes the viewpoints of persons with lived experience, patient care providers, and administrators. It is imperative to build on the themes identified in this survey, through engaging all health care professionals, to develop integrated and shared care models that will allow better patient outcomes. Several patient and organizational barriers to care were identified in this survey, which must inform the development of regional care models and pragmatic solutions to improve transitions for this patient population. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful in incorporating the perspectives of primary care providers and internal medicine specialists who provide the majority of HF care in Canada, which in turn limits our ability to comment on strategies for capacity building outside the HF clinic setting. These considerations must be taken into account when interpreting our findings. Engaging all HF care providers, to build on the themes identified in this survey, will be an important next step in developing integrated and shared care models known to improve patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC7242502 | biostudies-literature