How to Evaluate Online Education for General Practitioners: Development of a Tailored Questionnaire for Heart Failure Education.

Physician-oriented online education could be a pathway to improve care for patients with heart failure, however, it is difficult to measure the impact of such education. Self-efficacy is a potential outcome measure. In this article, we develop a methodology for analyzing an educational intervention for general practitioners (GPs) using self-efficacy as a concept. This study was partly conducted within the setting of an observational study, IMPACT-B, where we developed online education for GPs. We designed and refined a 24-item questionnaire using item analysis, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Ninety-one GPs completed the questionnaire before and after the online education. Follow-up data after 6 months was available for 13 GPs. Item analysis revealed a high degree of internal consistency (coefficient alpha 0.95) and validity. Each additional year of experience was associated with an average baseline self-efficacy score of 0.50 points (95% CI [0.21-0.80]), and each additional patient in HF follow-up with an average score of 2.0 points (95% CI [0.48-3.5]). Items that differentiated most between GPs with high and low self-efficacy were the treatment of congestion as well as titrating medication and MRA in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Factor analysis reduced the number of questions to 14, mapping to three factors (diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up), and improved the model fit as measured by the goodness-of-fit indicator comparative-fit-index (from 0.83 to 0.91). We demonstrated a method to assess the impact of online education on general practitioners. This led to a questionnaire that was reliable, valid, and convenient to use in an implementation context.

Community pharmacists' perceptions on multidisciplinary heart failure care: an exploratory qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem and guidelines recommend multidisciplinary management. The pharmacist is an important member of the multidisciplinary heart failure team, both in the hospital and community setting. This study aims to explore the perceptions of community pharmacists on their role in HF care. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study based on face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 13 Belgian community pharmacists between September 2020 and December 2020. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL) method as guidance for data analysis until data saturation was reached. We structured interview content into a thematic matrix. RESULTS: We identified two major themes: heart failure management and multidisciplinary management. Pharmacists feel responsible for the pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of heart failure, citing easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. Diagnostic uncertainty, lack of knowledge and time, disease complexity and difficulties in communication with patients and informal care providers are barriers to optimal management. General practitioners are the most important partners in multidisciplinary community heart failure management, although pharmacists perceive a lack of appreciation and cooperation and deplore communication difficulties. They feel intrinsically motivated to provide extended pharmaceutical care in HF but cite the lack of financial viability and information sharing structures as important barriers. CONCLUSION: The importance of pharmacist involvement in multidisciplinary heart failure teams is undisputed by Belgian pharmacists, who cite easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. They point out several barriers impeding evidence-based pharmacist care for outpatients with heart failure: diagnostic uncertainty and disease complexity, lack of multidisciplinary information technology and insufficient resources. We recommend that future policy should focus on improved medical data exchanges between primary and secondary care electronic health records as well as the reinforcement of interprofessional relationships between locally affiliated pharmacists and general practitioners.

Mixed-methods evaluation of a multifaceted heart failure intervention in general practice: the OSCAR-HF pilot study.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem for which multidisciplinary care is recommended, yet few studies involve primary care practitioners in the multidisciplinary management of HF. We set up a multifaceted prospective observational trial, OSCAR-HF, piloting audit and feedback, natriuretic peptide testing at the point of care, and the assistance of a specialist HF nurse in primary care. The aim was to optimize HF care in general practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an analysis at 6 month follow-up of the study interventions of the OSCAR-HF pilot study, a nonrandomized, noncontrolled prospective observational trial conducted in eight Belgian general practices [51 general practitioners (GPs)]. Patients who were assessed by their GP to have HF constituted the OSCAR-HF study population. We used descriptive statistics and mixed-effects modelling for the quantitative analysis and thematic analysis of the focus group interviews. There was a 10.2% increase in the registered HF population after 6 months of follow-up (n = 593) compared with baseline (n = 538) and a 27% increase in objectified HF diagnoses (baseline n = 359 to 456 at T6 M). Natriuretic peptide testing (with or without referral) accounted for 54% (n = 60/111) of the newly registered HF diagnoses. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction who received their target dosage of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors or beta-blockers at 6 months compared with baseline (P = 0.9). Patients who received an HF nurse intervention (n = 53) had significantly worse quality of life at baseline [difference in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score 9.2 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0, 14] and had a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up [change in MLHFQ score -9.8 points; 95% CI -15, -4.5] than patients without an HF nurse intervention. GPs found audit and feedback valuable but time intensive. Natriuretic peptides were useful, but the point-of-care test was impractical, and the assistance of an HF nurse was a useful addition to routine HF care. CONCLUSIONS: The use of audit and feedback combined with natriuretic peptide testing was a successful strategy to increase the number of registered and objectified HF diagnoses at 6 months. GPs and HF nurses selected patients with worse quality-of-life scores at baseline for the HF nurse intervention, which led to a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up compared with patients without an HF nurse intervention. The interventions were deemed feasible and useful by the participating GPs with some specific remarks that can be used for optimization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02905786), registered on 14 September 2016 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Patients' experiences and expectations of the General Practitioner's role during bereavement care after losing a loved one: A qualitative study.

General practitioners (GPs) are well positioned to support patients during their grieving process. This study investigated patients' experiences and expectations of their GP's role during bereavement care after losing a loved one. Semi-structured interviews (N = 14) were conducted to gain a deeper insight with the aim to improve the quality of primary bereavement care. Results showed a role for GPs in the assessment of and response to patients' needs. Patients had limited expectations of their GP but did appreciate it when their GP showed concern about their loss. It is recommended that GPs discuss bereavement care during patient encounters.

Integration of Chronic Care in a Fragmented Healthcare System Comment on "Integration or Fragmentation of Health Care? Examining Policies and Politics in a Belgian Case Study".

The authors of "Integration or Fragmentation of Health Care? Examining Policies and Politics in a Belgian Case Study" present a fresh perspective on the inertia of integrated care (IC) implementation. They conclude that the decisive power in Belgium is fragmented and undermines efforts towards IC. As researchers in integrated heart failure (HF) care and active primary healthcare professionals, we comment on the three policy initiatives evaluated by Martens et al from a bottom-up perspective. A Learning Healthcare Network (LHCN) was established September 2019 to overcome fragmentation, the lack of evaluation and capacity loss each time a pilot project ends. This commentary wishes to illustrate that a LHCN can be a powerful meso-level mechanism to engage in alignment work and to overcome macro-level barriers that are often difficult to change and not supportive of IC.

Machine learning optimization of an electronic health record audit for heart failure in primary care.

AIMS: The diagnosis of heart failure (HF) is an important problem in primary care. We previously demonstrated a 74% increase in registered HF diagnoses in primary care electronic health records (EHRs) following an extended audit procedure. What remains unclear is the accuracy of registered HF pre-audit and which EHR variables are most important in the extended audit strategy. This study aims to describe the diagnostic HF classification sequence at different stages, assess general practitioner (GP) HF misclassification, and test the predictive performance of an optimized audit. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a secondary analysis of the OSCAR-HF study, a prospective observational trial including 51 participating GPs. OSCAR used an extended audit based on typical HF risk factors, signs, symptoms, and medications in GPs' EHR. This resulted in a list of possible HF patients, which participating GPs had to classify as HF or non-HF. We compared registered HF diagnoses before and after GPs' assessment. For our analysis of audit performance, we used GPs' assessment of HF as primary outcome and audit queries as dichotomous predictor variables for a gradient boosted machine (GBM) decision tree algorithm and logistic regression model. Of the 18 011 patients eligible for the audit intervention, 4678 (26.0%) were identified as possible HF patients and submitted for GPs' assessment in the audit stage. There were 310 patients with registered HF before GP assessment, of whom 146 (47.1%) were judged not to have HF by their GP (over-registration). There were 538 patients with registered HF after GP assessment, of whom 374 (69.5%) did not have registered HF before GP assessment (under-registration). The GBM and logistic regression model had a comparable predictive performance (area under the curve of 0.70 [95% confidence interval 0.65-0.77] and 0.69 [95% confidence interval 0.64-0.75], respectively). This was not significantly impacted by reducing the set of predictor variables to the 10 most important variables identified in the GBM model (free-text and coded cardiomyopathy, ischaemic heart disease and atrial fibrillation, digoxin, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and combinations of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and beta-blockers with diuretics). This optimized query set was enough to identify 86% (n = 461/538) of GPs' self-assessed HF population with a 33% reduction (n = 1537/4678) in screening caseload. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic coding of HF in primary care health records is inaccurate with a high degree of under-registration and over-registration. An optimized query set enabled identification of more than 80% of GPs' self-assessed HF population.

Cardiologists' perceptions on multidisciplinary collaboration in heart failure care - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiologists play a key role in multidisciplinary care by guiding heart failure (HF) management in the hospital and in the community. Regional implementation of multidisciplinary health care interventions depends on how they perceive collaboration with other health care disciplines, yet research on this topic is limited. This study aimed to explore the views and opinions of cardiologists on multidisciplinary collaboration in HF care. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study based on face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 11 Belgian cardiologists between September 2019 and February 2020. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL) method as guidance for data analysis until data saturation was reached. RESULTS: Cardiologists consider the general practitioner (GP) and HF nurse as the most important partners in HF management. Cardiologists identified four problems in current multidisciplinary collaboration: the communication of a HF diagnosis to the patient, advanced care planning, titration of HF medication by the GP and electronic data exchange and communication. Three themes emerged as ideas for improvement of HF care: 1) expansion of the role of the HF nurse, 2) implementation of a structured, patient-centered, and flexible model of disease management program and 3) integrated data approaches. CONCLUSION: Cardiologists value close cooperation with GPs in HF management. They advocate an expanded future role for the HF nurse, increased eHealth, and structured disease management to optimize current HF care.

Impact of primary care involvement and setting on multidisciplinary heart failure management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Multidisciplinary disease management programmes (DMPs) are a cornerstone of modern guideline-recommended care for heart failure (HF). Few programmes are community initiated or involve primary care professionals, despite the importance of home-based care for HF. We compared the outcomes of different multidisciplinary HF DMPs in relation to their recruitment setting and involvement of primary care health professionals. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane between 2000 and 2020 using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Our meta-analysis included 19 randomized controlled trials (7577 patients), classified according to recruitment setting and involvement of primary care professionals. Thirteen studies recruited in the hospital (n = 5243 patients) and six in the community (n = 2334 patients). Only six studies involved primary care professionals (n = 3427 patients), with two of these recruited in the community (n = 225 patients). Multidisciplinary HF DMPs that recruited in the community had no significant effect on all-cause and HF readmissions nor on mortality, irrespective of primary care involvement. Studies that recruited in the hospital demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality (relative risk 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.76, 0.98]), HF readmissions (0.70, 95% CI [0.54, 0.89]), and all-cause readmissions (0.72, 95% CI [0.60, 0.87]). However, the difference in effect size between recruitment setting and involvement of primary care was not significant in a meta-regression analysis. Multidisciplinary HF DMPs that recruit in the community have no significant effect on mortality or hospital readmissions, unlike DMPs that recruit in the hospital, although the difference in effect size was not significant in a meta-regression analysis. Only six multidisciplinary studies involved primary care professionals. Given demographic evolutions and the importance of integrated home-based care for patients with HF, future multidisciplinary HF DMPs should consider integrating primary care professionals and evaluating the effectiveness of this model.

Implementing standards of care for heart failure patients in general practice - the IMPACT-B study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem. Most chronic HF management occurs in primary care. Although guidelines exist, there is an important implementation gap in current HF care in Belgium. METHODS: We will conduct a non-randomised, non-controlled prospective observational trial to implement guideline-recommended disease management interventions in primary care in Leuven, a region of ±100.000 inhabitants. These interventions include education of general practitioners, reimbursement of the analysis of circulating natriuretic peptides and audits in the electronic health record (EHR), training and implementation of HF educators in primary care, and a protocol to structure transition to primary care after discharge. The main objective is to study and implement interventions in an iterative implementation process. CONCLUSIONS: We will evaluate the implementation of several guideline-recommended disease management interventions to optimise the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure in a real-world primary care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04334447 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Impact of an extended audit on identifying heart failure patients in general practice: baseline results of the OSCAR-HF pilot study.

AIMS: Identifying heart failure (HF) patients in general practice is challenging, and little is known about the current quality of care. We implemented an extended audit from the electronic health records (EHRs) of general practitioners (GPs) to identify HF patients and investigate patient characteristics and quality of care. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study describes the baseline results of the OSCAR-HF pilot study in eight general practices (51 GPs) in Flanders, Belgium. This prospective trial ran for 6 months. Interventions included an extended audit, an N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide point-of-care test, and assistance of a specialist HF nurse. The extended audit searched on risk factors for HF, HF symptoms, signs, and medication in the GPs' EHR to generate a list of possible HF patients. GPs determined which patients had HF. Those HF patients constituted the OSCAR-HF study population. Each patient file was manually revised to extract biomarker measurements, echocardiography data, and quality indicators. An independent panel of experts assessed the validity of GPs' HF diagnoses. Feedback about the validity of the HF diagnosis was given to the GP. Out of 18 011 patients ≥ 40 years, we identified 310 patients with a registered HF diagnosis before the study start (HF prevalence: 1.7%). The extended audit led to a 74% increase in identified HF patients (n = 538, HF prevalence: 3.0%) with a mean age of 79 ± 11 years. The prevalence of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was 20% (n = 110). A high proportion of patients underwent echocardiography in the past 5 years (86%, n = 462). Natriuretic peptides were rarely available in patients' files (19%, n = 100). Medical specialists should improve communication about the HF diagnosis because a specialist diagnosis was present in only 225 patients (42%) while 67% (n = 359) of the HF diagnoses were judged objectified by a panel of experts. Assigning a diagnosis of HF was particularly difficult in HF patients with preserved EF (HFpEF). HFrEF treatment rates with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers (84%, n = 92) and beta-blockers (86%, n = 94) were very good; however, target doses were hardly reached (34% and 14%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted the need to improve case finding for HF in general practice and showed that an extended audit in the GPs' EHR was a successful strategy to do so. To improve the quality of HF care in general practice, specific strategies are needed to diagnose HFpEF and to reach target doses of disease-modifying drugs in HFrEF patients.

Epidemiology of knee osteoarthritis in general practice: a registry-based study.

OBJECTIVES: The present study investigated (1) trends in the prevalence and incidence of knee osteoarthritis over a 20-year period (1996-2015); (2) trends in multimorbidity and (3) trends in drug prescriptions. DESIGN: Registry-based study. SETTING: Primary healthcare, Flanders, Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected from Intego, a general practice-based morbidity registration network. In the study period between 1996 and 2015, data from 440 140 unique patients were available. OUTCOME MEASURES: Trends in prevalence and incidence rate of knee osteoarthritis were computed using joinpoint regression analysis. The mean disease count was calculated to assess trends in multimorbidity. In addition, the number of drug prescriptions was identified by the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification code and trends were equally recorded with joinpoint regression. RESULTS: The total age-standardised prevalence of knee osteoarthritis increased from 2.0% in 1996 to 3.6% in 2015. An upward trend was observed with an average annual percentage change (AAPC) of 2.5 (95% CI 2.2 to 2.9). In 2015, the prevalence rates in the 10 year age groups from the 45-54 years age group onwards were 3.1%, 5.6%, 9.0% and 13.9%, to reach 15.0% in people aged 85 years and older. The incidence remained stable with 3.75‰ in 2015 (AAPC=-0.5, 95% CI -1.4 to 0.5). The mean disease count significantly increased from 1.63 to 2.34 (p<0.001) for incident cases with knee osteoarthritis. Finally, we observed a significantly positive trend in the overall prescription of acetaminophen (AAPC=6.7, 95% CI 5.6 to 7.7), weak opioids (AAPC=4.0, 95% CI 0.9 to 7.3) and glucosamine (AAPC=8.6, 95% CI 2.4 to 15.1). Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were most prescribed, with a prevalence rate of 29.8% in 2015, but remained stable during the study period (AAPC=0.0, 95% CI -1.1 to 1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Increased prevalence, multimorbidity, and number of drug prescriptions confirm an increased burden of knee osteoarthritis. In future, these trends can be used to prioritise initiatives for improvement in care.

General practitioners' perceptions about their role in current and future heart failure care: an exploratory qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive disease management programme (DMP) with a central role for general practitioners (GPs) is needed to improve heart failure (HF) care. However, previous research has shown that GPs have mixed experiences with multidisciplinary HF care. Therefore, in this study, we explore the perceptions that GPs have regarding their role in current and future HF care, prior to the design of an HF disease management programme. METHODS: This was a qualitative semi-structured interview study with Belgian GPs until data saturation was reached. The QUAGOL method was used for data analysis. RESULTS: In general, GPs wanted to assume a central role in HF care. Current interdisciplinary collaboration with cardiologists was perceived as smooth, partly because of the ease of access. In contrast, due to less well-established communication and the variable knowledge of nurses regarding HF care, collaboration with home care nurses was perceived as suboptimal. With regard to the future organization of HF care, all GPs confirmed the need for a structured chronic care approach and envisioned this as a multidisciplinary care pathway: flexible, patient-centred, without additional administration and with appropriate delegation of some critical tasks, including education and monitoring. GPs considered all-round general practice nurses as the preferred partner to delegate tasks to in HF care and reported limited experience in collaborating with specialist HF nurses. CONCLUSION: GPs expressed the need for a protocol-driven care pathway in chronic HF care. However, in contrast to the existing care trajectories, this pathway should be flexible, without additional administrative burdens and with a central role for GPs.

Think-aloud study about the diagnosis of chronic heart failure in Belgian general practice.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosing chronic heart failure (CHF) in general practice is challenging. Our aim was to investigate how general practitioners (GPs) diagnose CHF in real-world patients. DESIGN: Think-aloud study. METHODS: Fourteen GPs were asked to reason about four real-world CHF cases from their own practices. The cases were selected through a clinical audit. This was followed by an interview to get a deeper insight in their reasoning. The Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven was used as a guide in data analysis. RESULTS: We developed a conceptual diagnostic model based on three important reasoning steps. First, GPs assessed the likelihood of CHF based on the presence or absence of HF signs and symptoms. However, this approach had serious limitations since GPs experienced many barriers in their clinical assessment, especially in comorbid elderly. Second, if CHF was considered based on step 1, the main influencing factor to take further diagnostic steps was the GPs' perception of the added value of a validated CHF diagnosis in that specific case. Third, the choice and implications of these further diagnostic steps (N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, ECG and/or cardiac ultrasound) were influenced by the GPs' knowledge about these tests and the quality of the cardiologists' reports. CONCLUSION: This think-aloud study identified the factors that influenced the diagnostic reasoning about CHF in general practice. As a consequence, targets to improve this diagnostic reasoning were withheld: a paradigm shift towards an earlier and more comprehensive risk assessment with, among others, access to natriuretic peptide testing and convincing GPs of the added value of a validated HF diagnosis.

Burden of heart failure in Flemish general practices: a registry-based study in the Intego database.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence and incidence of heart failure (HF) stages A to C/D and their evolution over a 16-year period. Additionally, trends in comorbidities and cardiovascular (CV) treatment in patients with HF were studied in the same period. DESIGN: Registry-based study. SETTING: Primary care, Flanders, Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Data were obtained from Intego, a morbidity registration network in which 111 general practitioners of 48 practices collaborate. In the study period between 2000 and 2015, data from 165 796 unique patients aged 45 years and older were available. OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and incidence were calculated for HF stage A, B and C/D by gender. Additionally, the trend in age-standardised prevalence and incidence rates between 2000 and 2015 was analysed with joint-point regression. The same model was used to study trends in comorbidity profiles in incident HF cases and trends in cardiovascular medication in prevalent HF cases. RESULTS: We found a downward trend in the incidence and prevalence of HF stage C/D in Flemish general practice between 2000 and 2015, whereas the prevalence and incidence of stage A and B increased. The burden of comorbidities in incident HF cases increased during the study period, as shown by an increasing disease count (p<0.001). The prescription of cardiovascular medication such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade, ß-blockers and statins showed a sharp increase in the first part of the study period (2000-2008). CONCLUSION: Age-standardised incidence and prevalence of HF stage C/D showed a slightly downward trend over the past 16 years, probably due to the sharp increase in cardiovascular treatment. However, the increasing age-standardised incidence and prevalence of stage A and B, as precursors of symptomatic HF, together with a rising comorbid burden, highlights the challenges we are still facing.

Optimising standards of care of heart failure in general practice the OSCAR-HF pilot study protocol.

Background: Heart failure (HF) imposes a burden for patients and health economics. General practitioners (GPs) are confronted with the broadest range of HF management. Although guidelines exist, they are not fully implemented in the Belgian health care system. Methods: We will conduct a non-randomised, non-controlled prospective observational trial (six months follow-up) to implement a multifaceted intervention in Belgian general practice to support GPs in the implementation of evidence-based HF guidelines. The multifaceted intervention consists of an audit and feedback method to detect previously unrecognised patients with HF and to increase awareness for proactive HF management, an NT-proBNP point-of-care test to improve detection and adequate diagnosis of patients with HF and a specialist HF nurse to assist GPs in the education of patients, optimisation of treatment and follow-up after hospitalisation. All patients aged 40 years and older with a confirmed diagnosis of HF by their GP based on the clinical audit are eligible for participation. The main objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of this multifaceted intervention and the evolution of predefined quality indicators. We will measure the impact on HF diagnosis, medication optimisation, multidisciplinary follow-up and patients' quality of life after six months. Additionally, the experiences of GPs and investigators will be studied. Conclusions: Heart failure is an important health problem in which GPs play a key role. Therefore, we will evaluate the feasibility of a multifaceted intervention to optimise diagnosis as well as implement the guideline recommended therapies in patients with HF in general practice.

Defining quality indicators for heart failure in general practice.

Background: Quality indicators (QIs) are used to measure and evaluate quality of care. However, QIs to evaluate care for HF patients in general practice in Belgium are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to determine which QIs, rooted in the electronic health record (EHR), are useful to monitor quality of care for patients with HF in general practice. Methods: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (a modified Delphi method) was used to define these assigned QIs. First, a literature review was performed to generate a list of possible QIs for HF. Second, by applying the SMART principle, 25 QIs were withheld. Third, an expert panel of health care providers experienced in HF (cardiologists, general practitioners and HF nurses) was convened. Finally, the panellists rated the QIs for appropriateness in three rounds. Results: The withheld QIs highlighted diverse aspects of HF care. In round 1, 20 of the 25 QIs were considered appropriate, and five were considered uncertain. In round 2, 19 QIs were rated appropriate, four inappropriate, and two uncertain. In round 3, the final 19 appropriate QIs were ranked to form a top 10. The top three began with the identification of the aetiology of HF, continued with the differentiation between HF with preserved and reduced ejection fraction, and concluded with the treatment of HF with an ACE-I and a ß-blocker in third place. Conclusion: In this study, 19 QIs for HF in general practice, extractable from the EHR, were identified. These QIs should enable the qualitative monitoring of HF care.

Methods to identify heart failure patients in general practice and their impact on patient characteristics: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients with heart failure (HF) in general practice is challenging. Our aim was to provide an overview of methods used to identify patients with HF in general practice and to assess their impact on patient characteristics. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Taken together, 105 studies on HF in general practice were included, totalling 196,105 patients. Five main identification methods for HF were distinguished, including 1) echocardiographic assessments, 2) results of echocardiography in general practitioner (GP) charts, 3) GP judgment after chart review, 4) GP judgment of consecutive patients and 5) only chart review. Only 30% of studies used the results of echocardiography. Despite a large heterogeneity between studies the pooled data revealed a predominant phenotype of older women with hypertension rather than ischaemic heart disease. Linear regression analysis showed that the impact of the identification method on patient characteristics was limited. However, study design had a greater impact, with randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) including younger, male patients with ischaemic heart disease and higher HF drug prescription rates at baseline. CONCLUSION: Pooled data of 196,105 patients with HF confirmed a phenotype of older women with hypertension rather than ischaemic heart disease as the predominant HF population in general practice. The lack of a gold standard definition of HF introduced a large heterogeneity in identification methods with remarkably limited impact on patient characteristics. However, RCTs did include patients with a different phenotype, emphasizing the need to promote inclusion of real-world HF patients.

Accuracy, user-friendliness and usefulness of the Cobas h232 point-of-care test for NT-proBNP in primary care.

AIMS: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has been shown to be useful for ruling out heart failure in primary care. In this study, we examined the accuracy of the Cobas h232 point-of-care (POC) instrument in primary care compared with an in-hospital measurement. Furthermore, we investigated the user-friendliness and usefulness of the POC device. METHODS: Five general practitioner (GP) groups were asked to evaluate adult patients who were suspected of having heart failure and to test NT-proBNP with the Cobas h232. The samples were subsequently delivered to and analysed at a central hospital laboratory by the Cobas e602 using conventional transport and storage. Difference between the paired measurements was analysed using a percentage difference plot, and correlation was assessed using Passing-Bablok linear regression analysis. User-friendliness and usefulness were assessed using semistructured questionnaires. RESULTS: Nineteen GPs studied 94 patients. Passing-Bablok analysis showed a slope of 1.05 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.11) (R2=0.97). The percentage difference plot showed a mean difference of 15.7% (95% CI -46.0% to -77.4%). User-friendliness and usefulness had median scores of 4 or 5 on a five-point Likert scale. Eighteen out of 19 GPs confirmed that the device influenced their clinical practice. During the study, GPs' confidence in using NT-proBNP increased significantly from a mean score of 4.4 (95% CI 3.2 to 5.6) to 7.6 out of 10 (95% CI 7.1 to 8.2). CONCLUSIONS: The Cobas h232 NT-proBNP POC test proved to be an accurate, user-friendly and useful test in primary care. Nearly all participating GPs were convinced that the test could benefit clinical decision making.

Improving care for heart failure patients in primary care, GPs' perceptions: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in heart failure (HF) management. Despite multiple guidelines, the management of patients with HF in primary care is suboptimal. Therefore, all the qualitative evidence concerning GPs' perceptions of managing HF in primary care was synthesised to identify barriers and facilitators for optimal care, and ideas for improvement. DESIGN: Qualitative evidence synthesis. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL databases up to 20/12/2015 were conducted. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme's checklist for qualitative research was used for quality assessment. Thematic analysis was used as method of analysis. RESULTS: Of 5427 articles, 18 qualitative articles were included. Findings were organised in HF-specific factors, patient factors, physician factors and contextual factors. GPs' uncertainty in all areas of HF management was highlighted. HF management started with an uncertain diagnosis, leading to difficulties with communication, treatment and advance care planning. Lack of access to specialised care and lack of knowledge were identified as important contributors to this uncertainty. In an effort to overcome this, strategies bringing evidence into practice should be promoted. GPs expressed the need for a multidisciplinary chronic care approach for HF. However, mixed experiences were noted with regard to interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: The main challenges identified in this synthesis were how to deal with GPs' uncertainty about clinical practice, how to bring evidence into practice and how to work together as a multiprofessional team. These barriers were situated predominantly on the physician and contextual level. Targets to improve GPs' HF care were identified.

Diagnostic rules and algorithms for the diagnosis of non-acute heart failure in patients 80†years of age and older: a diagnostic accuracy and validation study.

OBJECTIVES: Different diagnostic algorithms for non-acute heart failure (HF) exist. Our aim was to compare the ability of these algorithms to identify HF in symptomatic patients aged 80 years and older and identify those patients at highest risk for mortality. DESIGN: Diagnostic accuracy and validation study. SETTING: General practice, Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: 365 patients with HF symptoms aged 80 years and older (BELFRAIL cohort). Participants underwent a full clinical assessment, including a detailed echocardiographic examination at home. OUTCOME MEASURES: The diagnostic accuracy of 4 different algorithms was compared using an intention-to-diagnose analysis. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) definition of HF was used as the reference standard for HF diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier curves for 5-year all-cause mortality were plotted and HRs and corresponding 95% CIs were calculated to compare the mortality risk predicting abilities of the different algorithms. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) was calculated. RESULTS: The prevalence of HF was 20% (n=74). The 2012 ESC algorithm yielded the highest sensitivity (92%, 95% CI 83% to 97%) as well as the highest referral rate (71%, n=259), whereas the Oudejans algorithm yielded the highest specificity (73%, 95% CI 68% to 78%) and the lowest referral rate (36%, n=133). These differences could be ascribed to differences in N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide cut-off values (125 vs 400 pg/mL). The Kelder and Oudejans algorithms exhibited NRIs of 12% (95% CI 0.7% to 22%, p=0.04) and 22% (95% CI 9% to 32%, p<0.001), respectively, compared with the ESC algorithm. All algorithms detected patients at high risk for mortality (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.5; Kelder) to 2.3 (95% CI 1.7 to 3.1; Oudejans). No significant differences were observed among the algorithms with respect to mortality risk predicting abilities. CONCLUSIONS: Choosing a diagnostic algorithm for non-acute HF in elderly patients represents a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, mainly depending on differences between cut-off values for natriuretic peptides.