Smartphone-Based Remote Monitoring for Chronic Heart Failure: Mixed Methods Analysis of User Experience From Patient and Nurse Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Community-based management by heart failure specialist nurses (HFSNs) is key to improving self-care in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Remote monitoring (RM) can aid nurse-led management, but in the literature, user feedback evaluation is skewed in favor of the patient rather than nursing user experience. Furthermore, the ways in which different groups use the same RM platform at the same time are rarely directly compared in the literature. We present a balanced semantic analysis of user feedback from patient and nurse perspectives of Luscii, a smartphone-based RM strategy combining self-measurement of vital signs, instant messaging, and e-learning. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) evaluate how patients and nurses use this type of RM (usage type), (2) evaluate patients' and nurses' user feedback on this type of RM (user experience), and (3) directly compare the usage type and user experience of patients and nurses using the same type of RM platform at the same time. METHODS: We performed a retrospective usage type and user experience evaluation of the RM platform from the perspective of both patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and the HFSNs using the platform to manage them. We conducted semantic analysis of written patient feedback provided via the platform and a focus group of 6 HFSNs. Additionally, as an indirect measure of tablet adherence, self-measured vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate, and body mass) were extracted from the RM platform at onboarding and 3 months later. Paired 2-tailed t tests were used to evaluate differences between mean scores across the 2 timepoints. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients (mean age 62 years; 35%, 28/79 female) were included. Semantic analysis of usage type revealed extensive, bidirectional information exchange between patients and HFSNs using the platform. Semantic analysis of user experience demonstrates a range of positive and negative perspectives. Positive impacts included increased patient engagement, convenience for both user groups, and continuity of care. Negative impacts included information overload for patients and increased workload for nurses. After the patients used the platform for 3 months, they showed significant reductions in heart rate (P=.004) and blood pressure (P=.008) but not body mass (P=.97) compared with onboarding. CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone-based RM with messaging and e-learning facilitates bilateral information sharing between patients and nurses on a range of topics. Patient and nurse user experience is largely positive and symmetrical, but there are possible negative impacts on patient attention and nurse workload. We recommend RM providers involve patient and nurse users in platform development, including recognition of RM usage in nursing job plans.

Smartphone-Based Remote Monitoring in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Retrospective Cohort Study of Secondary Care Use and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Despite effective therapies, the economic burden of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is driven by frequent hospitalizations. Treatment optimization and admission avoidance rely on frequent symptom reviews and monitoring of vital signs. Remote monitoring (RM) aims to prevent admissions by facilitating early intervention, but the impact of noninvasive, smartphone-based RM of vital signs on secondary health care use and costs in the months after a new diagnosis of HFrEF is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to conduct a secondary care health use and health-economic evaluation for patients with HFrEF using smartphone-based noninvasive RM and compare it with matched controls receiving usual care without RM. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 2 cohorts of newly diagnosed HFrEF patients, matched 1:1 for demographics, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, and HFrEF severity. They are (1) the RM group, with patients using the RM platform for >3 months and (2) the control group, with patients referred before RM was available who received usual heart failure care without RM. Emergency department (ED) attendance, hospital admissions, outpatient use, and the associated costs of this secondary care activity were extracted from the Discover data set for a 3-month period after diagnosis. Platform costs were added for the RM group. Secondary health care use and costs were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier event analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients (mean age 63 years; 42/146, 29% female) were included (73 in each group). The groups were well-matched for all baseline characteristics except hypertension (P=.03). RM was associated with a lower hazard of ED attendance (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43; P=.02) and unplanned admissions (HR 0.26; P=.02). There were no differences in elective admissions (HR 1.03, P=.96) or outpatient use (HR 1.40; P=.18) between the 2 groups. These differences were sustained by a univariate model controlling for hypertension. Over a 3-month period, secondary health care costs were approximately 4-fold lower in the RM group than the control group, despite the additional cost of RM itself (mean cost per patient GBP £465, US $581 vs GBP £1850, US $2313, respectively; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective cohort study shows that smartphone-based RM of vital signs is feasible for HFrEF. This type of RM was associated with an approximately 2-fold reduction in ED attendance and a 4-fold reduction in emergency admissions over just 3 months after a new diagnosis with HFrEF. Costs were significantly lower in the RM group without increasing outpatient demand. This type of RM could be adjunctive to standard care to reduce admissions, enabling other resources to help patients unable to use RM.

Survival and health economic outcomes in heart failure diagnosed at hospital admission versus community settings: a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Most patients with heart failure (HF) are diagnosed following a hospital admission. The clinical and health economic impacts of index HF diagnosis made on admission to hospital versus community settings are not known. METHODS: We used the North West London Discover database to examine 34 208 patients receiving an index diagnosis of HF between January 2015 and December 2020. A propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort was identified to adjust for differences in socioeconomic status, cardiovascular risk and pre-diagnosis health resource utilisation cost. Outcomes were stratified by two pathways to index HF diagnosis: a 'hospital pathway' was defined by diagnosis following hospital admission; and a 'community pathway' by diagnosis via a general practitioner or outpatient services. The primary clinical and health economic endpoints were all-cause mortality and cost-consequence differential, respectively. RESULTS: The diagnosis of HF was via hospital pathway in 68% (23 273) of patients. The PSM cohort included 17 174 patients (8582 per group) and was matched across all selected confounders (p>0.05). The ratio of deaths per person-months at 24 months comparing community versus hospital diagnosis was 0.780 (95% CI 0.722 to 0.841, p<0.0001). By 72 months, the ratio of deaths was 0.960 (0.905 to 1.020, p=0.18). Diagnosis via hospital pathway incurred an overall extra longitudinal cost of £2485 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Index diagnosis of HF through hospital admission continues to dominate and is associated with a significantly greater short-term risk of mortality and substantially increased long-term costs than if first diagnosed in the community. This study highlights the potential for community diagnosis-early, before symptoms necessitate hospitalisation-to improve both clinical and health economic outcomes.

Developing the Heart Failure Specialist Nurse Competency Framework.

The aim of this article is to outline the underpinning conceptual principles of advanced nursing and competency embedded in the Heart Failure Specialist Nurse Competency Framework, launched in January 2021. The authors refer to Benner's novice to expert pedagogy and explore how this provides a robust framework on which to assess the progress of the heart failure specialist nurse. Some key considerations are discussed, for example the importance of constructive feedback and feed-forward in the individual's learning cycle. Finally, plans for the future are discussed and the importance of evaluation in the authors' ongoing commitment to improving the learning experience.

Heart failure care pathways: the power of collaboration and marginal gains.

Heart failure (HF) is increasingly common and incurs a substantial cost, both in terms of quality and length of life, but also in terms of societal and economic impact. While significant gains are being made in the therapeutic management of HF, we continue to diagnose most patients when they are acutely unwell in hospital, often with advanced disease. This article presents our experience in working collaboratively with primary care colleagues to redesign our HF pathway with the aim of facilitating earlier, community, diagnosis of HF. In so doing, and, thus, starting prognostic therapy much earlier in the course of the disease, we seek to avoid both the cost of emergency hospitalisation and the cost of poorer outcomes.

New horizons in cardiogeriatrics: geriatricians and heart failure care-the custard in the tart, not the icing on the cake.

Heart failure (HF) can be considered a disease of older people. It is a leading cause of hospitalisation and is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality in the over-65s. In 2012, an editorial in this journal detailed the latest HF research and guidelines, calling for greater integration of geriatricians in HF care. This current article reflects upon what has been achieved in this field in recent years, highlighting some future challenges and promising areas. It is written from the perspective of one such integrated team and explores the new role of cardiogeriatrician, working in a multidisciplinary team to deliver and improve care to increasingly complex, older, frail patients with multiple comorbidities who present with primary cardiology problems, especially decompensated HF. Geriatric liaison has improved the care of frail patients in orthopaedics, cancer services, stroke, acute medicine and numerous community settings. We propose that this vital role should now be extended to cardiology teams in general and to HF in particular.

The impact of COVID-19 on the management of heart failure: a United Kingdom patient questionnaire study.

AIMS: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created significant challenges to healthcare globally, necessitating rapid restructuring of service provision. This questionnaire survey was conducted amongst adult heart failure (HF) patients in the United Kingdom (UK), to understand the impact of COVID-19 upon HF services. METHODS AND RESULTS: The survey was conducted by the Pumping Marvellous Foundation, a UK HF patient charity. 'Survey Monkey' was used to disseminate the questionnaire in the Pumping Marvellous Foundation 's online patient group and in 10 UK hospitals (outpatient hospital and community HF clinics). There were 1050 responses collected (693/1050-66% women); 55% (579/1050) were aged over 60 years. Anxiety level was significantly higher regarding COVID-19 (mean 7 ± 2.5 on anxiety scale of 0 to 10) compared with anxiety regarding HF (6.1 ± 2.4; P < 0.001). Anxiety was higher amongst patients aged ≤60 years about HF (6.3 ± 2.2 vs. 5.9 ± 2.5 in those aged >60 years; P = 0.005) and COVID-19 (7.3 ± 2.3 vs. 6.7 ± 2.6 those aged >60 years; P < 0.001). Sixty-five per cent of respondents (686/1050) reported disruption to HF appointments (cancellation or postponement) during the lockdown period. Thirty-seven per cent reported disruption to medication prescription services, and Thirty-four per cent reported inability to access their HF teams promptly. Thirty-two per cent expressed reluctance to attend hospital (25% stated they would only attend hospital if there was no alternative, and 7% stated that they would not attend hospital at all). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant anxiety amongst HF patients regarding COVID-19 and HF. Cancellation or postponement of scheduled clinic appointments, investigations, procedures, prescription, and monitoring services were implicated as sources of anxiety.

The effect of concomitant COVID-19 infection on outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure.

AIMS: Patients with cardiovascular disease appear particularly susceptible to severe COVID-19 disease, but the impact of COVID-19 infection on patients with heart failure (HF) is not known. This study aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 infection on mortality in hospitalized patients known to have HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of all patients admitted with a pre-existing diagnosis of HF between 1 March and 6 May 2020 to our unit. We assessed the impact of concomitant COVID-19 infection on in-hospital mortality, incidence of acute kidney injury, and myocardial injury. One hundred and thirty-four HF patients were hospitalized, 40 (29.9%) with concomitant COVID-19 infection. Those with COVID-19 infection had a significantly increased in-hospital mortality {50.0% vs. 10.6%; relative risk [RR] 4.70 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.42-9.12], P < 0.001} and were more likely to develop acute kidney injury [45% vs. 24.5%; RR 1.84 (95% CI 1.12-3.01), P = 0.02], have evidence of myocardial injury [57.5% vs. 31.9%; RR 1.81 (95% CI 1.21-2.68), P < 0.01], and be treated for a superadded bacterial infection [55% vs. 32.5%; RR 1.67 (95% CI 1.12-2.49), P = 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HF admitted to hospital with concomitant COVID-19 infection have a very poor prognosis. This study highlights the need to regard patients with HF as a high-risk group to be shielded to reduce the risks of COVID-19 infection.

Is heart failure with mid range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) a distinct clinical entity or an overlap group?

BACKGROUND: The new category of heart failure (HF), Heart Failure with mid range Ejection Fraction (HFmrEF) has recently been proposed with recent publications reporting that HFmrEF represents a transitional phase. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with HFmrEF and to establish what proportion of patients transitioned to other types of HF, and how this affected clinical outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were diagnosed with HF according to the 2016 ESC guidelines. Clinical outcomes and variables were recorded for all consecutive in-patients referred to the heart failure service. In total, 677 patients with new HF were identified; 25.6% with HFpEF, 21% with HFmrEF and 53.5% with HFrEF. While clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of HFmrEF were intermediate between HFrEF and HFpEF, HFmrEF patients had the best outcome, with higher mortality in the HFrEF population (p 0.02) and higher HF rehospitalisation rates in the HFpEF population (p < 0.01).38.7% of the HFmrEF patients transitioned (56.4% to HFpEF and 43.6% to HFrEF) with fewest deaths in the patients that transitioned to HFpEF (p 0.04), and fewest HF readmissions in the patients that remained as HFmrEF (<0.01). CONCLUSION: HFmrEF patients had the best outcomes, compared to high rates of mortality seen in patients with HFrEF and high rates of HF readmissions seen in patients with HFpEF. Only 1/3 of HFmrEF patients transitioned during follow up, with the lowest mortality seen in patients transitioning to HFpEF.