Impact of telemedical management on hospitalization and mortality in heart failure patients with diabetes: a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the TIM-HF2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TIM-HF2 study demonstrated that remote patient management (RPM) in a well-defined heart failure (HF) population reduced the percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions or all-cause death during 1-year follow-up (hazard ratio 0.80) and all-cause mortality alone (HR 0.70). Higher rates of hospital admissions and mortality have been reported in HF patients with diabetes compared with HF patients without diabetes. Therefore, in a post-hoc analysis of the TIM-HF2 study, we investigated the efficacy of RPM in HF patients with diabetes. METHODS: TIM-HF2 study was a randomized, controlled, unmasked (concealed randomization), multicentre trial, performed in Germany between August 2013 and May 2018. HF-Patients in NYHA class II/III who had a HF-related hospital admission within the previous 12 months, irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction, and were randomized to usual care with or without added RPM and followed for 1 year. The primary endpoint was days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospitalization or due to death of any cause. This post-hoc analysis included 707 HF patients with diabetes. RESULTS: In HF patients with diabetes, RPM reduced the percentage of days lost due to cardiovascular hospitalization or death compared with usual care (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48-0.90), and the rate of all-cause mortality alone (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32-0.85). RPM was also associated with an improvement in quality of life (mean difference in change in global score of Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score (MLHFQ): - 3.4, 95% CI - 6.2 to - 0.6). CONCLUSION: These results support the use of RPM in HF patients with diabetes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01878630.

Safety and efficacy of long-term sodium channel blocker therapy for early rhythm control: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: Clinical concerns exist about the potential proarrhythmic effects of the sodium channel blockers (SCBs) flecainide and propafenone in patients with cardiovascular disease. Sodium channel blockers were used to deliver early rhythm control (ERC) therapy in EAST-AFNET 4. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events related to rhythm control therapy) and primary efficacy outcome (cardiovascular death, stroke, and hospitalization for worsening of heart failure (HF) or acute coronary syndrome) during SCB intake for patients with ERC (n = 1395) in EAST-AFNET 4. The protocol discouraged flecainide and propafenone in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and suggested stopping therapy upon QRS prolongation >25% on therapy. Flecainide or propafenone was given to 689 patients [age 69 (8) years; CHA2DS2-VASc 3.2 (1); 177 with HF; 41 with prior myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, or percutaneous coronary intervention; 26 with left ventricular hypertrophy >15 mm; median therapy duration 1153 [237, 1828] days]. The primary efficacy outcome occurred less often in patients treated with SCB [3/100 (99/3316) patient-years] than in patients who never received SCB [SCBnever 4.9/100 (150/3083) patient-years, P < 0.001]. There were numerically fewer primary safety outcomes in patients receiving SCB [2.9/100 (96/3359) patient-years] than in SCBnever patients [4.2/100 (135/3220) patient-years, adjusted P = 0.015]. Sinus rhythm at 2 years was similar between groups [SCB 537/610 (88); SCBnever 472/579 (82)]. CONCLUSION: Long-term therapy with flecainide or propafenone appeared to be safe in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial to deliver effective ERC therapy, including in selected patients with stable cardiovascular disease such as coronary artery disease and stable HF. Clinical Trial Registration ISRCTN04708680, NCT01288352, EudraCT2010-021258-20, www.easttrial.org.

Temperature Control After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to determine the effect of hypothermic temperature control after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) on mortality and functional outcome as compared with normothermia. METHODS: An investigator initiated, open-label, blinded-outcome-assessor, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing hypothermic temperature control (32-34°C) for 24 h with normothermia after IHCA in 11 hospitals in Germany. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality after 180 days. Secondary end points included in-hospital mortality and favorable functional outcome using the Cerebral Performance Category scale after 180 days. A Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2 was defined as a favorable functional outcome. RESULTS: A total of 1055 patients were screened for eligibility and 249 patients were randomized: 126 were assigned to hypothermic temperature control and 123 to normothermia. The mean age of the cohort was 72.6±10.4 years, 64% (152 of 236) were male, 73% (166 of 227) of cardiac arrests were witnessed, 25% (57 of 231) had an initial shockable rhythm, and time to return of spontaneous circulation was 16.4±10.5 minutes. Target temperature was reached within 4.2±2.8 hours after randomization in the hypothermic group and temperature was controlled for 48 hours at 37.0°±0.9°C in the normothermia group. Mortality by day 180 was 72.5% (87 of 120) in hypothermic temperature control arm, compared with 71.2% (84 of 118) in the normothermia group (relative risk, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.79-1.40]; P=0.822). In-hospital mortality was 62.5% (75 of 120) in the hypothermic temperature control as compared with 57.6% (68 of 118) in the normothermia group (relative risk, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.86-1.46, P=0.443). Favorable functional outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2) by day 180 was 22.5% (27 of 120) in the hypothermic temperature control, compared with 23.7% (28 of 118) in the normothermia group (relative risk, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.78-1.44]; P=0.822). The study was prematurely terminated because of futility. CONCLUSIONS: Hypothermic temperature control as compared with normothermia did not improve survival nor functional outcome at day 180 in patients presenting with coma after IHCA. The HACA in-hospital trial (Hypothermia After Cardiac Arrest in-hospital) was underpowered and may have failed to detect clinically important differences between hypothermic temperature control and normothermia. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00457431.

Early Rhythm Control in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and High Comorbidity Burden.

BACKGROUND: The randomized EAST-AFNET4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial-Atrial Fibrillation Network) demonstrated that early rhythm control (ERC) reduces adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation and stroke risk factors. The effectiveness and safety of ERC in patients with multiple cardiovascular comorbidities is not known. METHODS: These prespecified subanalyses of EAST-AFNET4 compared the effectiveness and safety of ERC with usual care (UC) stratified into patients with higher (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4) and lower comorbidity burden. Sensitivity analyses ignored sex (CHA2DS2-VA score). RESULTS: EAST-AFNET4 randomized 1093 patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (74.8±6.8 years, 61% female) and 1696 with CHA2DS2-VASc score <4 (67.4±8.0 years, 37% female). ERC reduced the composite primary efficacy outcome of cardiovascular death, stroke, or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure or for acute coronary syndrome in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (ERC, 127/549 patients with events; UC, 183/544 patients with events; hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [0.51-0.81]; P < 0.001) but not in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score <4 (ERC, 122/846 patients with events; UC, 133/850 patients with events; HR, 0.93 [0.73-1.19]; P=0.56, Pinteraction=0.037). The primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events of rhythm control therapy) was not different between study groups in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 (ERC, 112/549 patients with events; UC, 132/544 patients with events; HR, 0.84 [0.65, 1.08]; P=0.175), but occurred more often in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores <4 randomized to ERC (ERC, 119/846 patients with events; UC, 91/850 patients with events; HR, 1.39 [1.05-1.82]; P=0.019, Pinteraction=0.008). Life-threatening events or death were not different between groups (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4, ERC, 84/549 patients with event, UC, 96/544 patients with event; CHA2DS2-VASc scores <4, ERC, 75/846 patients with event, UC, 73/850 patients with event). When female sex was ignored for the creation of higher and lower risk groups (CHA2DS2-VA score), the Pinteraction was not significant for the primary efficacy outcome (P=0.25), but remained significant (P=0.044) for the primary safety outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recently diagnosed atrial fibrillation and CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥4 should be considered for ERC to reduce cardiovascular outcomes, whereas those with fewer comorbidities may have less favorable outcomes with ERC. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01288352. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu; Unique identifier: 2010-021258-20. URL: https://www.isrctn.com/; Unique identifier: ISRCTN04708680.

Early Rhythm-Control Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in the management of atrial fibrillation, patients with this condition remain at increased risk for cardiovascular complications. It is unclear whether early rhythm-control therapy can reduce this risk. METHODS: In this international, investigator-initiated, parallel-group, open, blinded-outcome-assessment trial, we randomly assigned patients who had early atrial fibrillation (diagnosed ≤1 year before enrollment) and cardiovascular conditions to receive either early rhythm control or usual care. Early rhythm control included treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs or atrial fibrillation ablation after randomization. Usual care limited rhythm control to the management of atrial fibrillation-related symptoms. The first primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or hospitalization with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome; the second primary outcome was the number of nights spent in the hospital per year. The primary safety outcome was a composite of death, stroke, or serious adverse events related to rhythm-control therapy. Secondary outcomes, including symptoms and left ventricular function, were also evaluated. RESULTS: In 135 centers, 2789 patients with early atrial fibrillation (median time since diagnosis, 36 days) underwent randomization. The trial was stopped for efficacy at the third interim analysis after a median of 5.1 years of follow-up per patient. A first-primary-outcome event occurred in 249 of the patients assigned to early rhythm control (3.9 per 100 person-years) and in 316 patients assigned to usual care (5.0 per 100 person-years) (hazard ratio, 0.79; 96% confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.94; P = 0.005). The mean (±SD) number of nights spent in the hospital did not differ significantly between the groups (5.8±21.9 and 5.1±15.5 days per year, respectively; P = 0.23). The percentage of patients with a primary safety outcome event did not differ significantly between the groups; serious adverse events related to rhythm-control therapy occurred in 4.9% of the patients assigned to early rhythm control and 1.4% of the patients assigned to usual care. Symptoms and left ventricular function at 2 years did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early rhythm-control therapy was associated with a lower risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes than usual care among patients with early atrial fibrillation and cardiovascular conditions. (Funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research and others; EAST-AFNET 4 ISRCTN number, ISRCTN04708680; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01288352; EudraCT number, 2010-021258-20.).

Cost-effectiveness of early rhythm control vs. usual care in atrial fibrillation care: an analysis based on data from the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: The randomized, controlled EAST-AFNET 4 trial showed that early rhythm control (ERC) reduces the rate of a composite primary outcome (cardiovascular death, stroke, or hospitalization for worsening heart failure or acute coronary syndrome) by ∼20%. The current study examined the cost-effectiveness of ERC compared to usual care. METHODS AND RESULTS: This within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was based on data from the German subsample of the EAST-AFNET 4 trial (n = 1664/2789 patients). Over a 6-year time horizon and from a healthcare payer's perspective, ERC was compared to usual care regarding costs (hospitalization and medication) and effects (time to primary outcome; years survived). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed to visualize uncertainty. Early rhythm control was associated with higher costs [+€1924, 95% CI (-€399, €4246)], resulting in ICERs of €10 638 per additional year without a primary outcome and €22 536 per life year gained. The probability of ERC being cost-effective compared to usual care was ≥95% or ≥80% at a willingness-to-pay value of ≥€55 000 per additional year without a primary outcome or life year gained, respectively. CONCLUSION: From a German healthcare payer's perspective, health benefits of ERC may come at reasonable costs as indicated by the ICER point estimates. Taking statistical uncertainty into account, cost-effectiveness of ERC is highly probable at a willingness-to-pay value of ≥€55 000 per additional life year or year without a primary outcome. Future studies examining the cost-effectiveness of ERC in other countries, subgroups with higher benefit from rhythm control therapy, or cost-effectiveness of different modes of ERC are warranted.

Attaining sinus rhythm mediates improved outcome with early rhythm control therapy of atrial fibrillation: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: A strategy of systematic, early rhythm control (ERC) improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). It is not known how this outcome-reducing effect is mediated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the Early treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke prevention Trial (EAST-AFNET 4) data set, potential mediators of the effect of ERC were identified in the total study population at 12-month follow up and further interrogated by use of a four-way decomposition of the treatment effect in an exponential model predicting future primary outcome events. Fourteen potential mediators of ERC were identified at the 12-month visit. Of these, sinus rhythm at 12 months explained 81% of the treatment effect of ERC compared with usual care during the remainder of follow up (4.1 years). In patients not in sinus rhythm at 12 months, ERC did not reduce future cardiovascular outcomes (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.65-1.67). Inclusion of AF recurrence in the model only explained 31% of the treatment effect, and inclusion of systolic blood pressure at 12 months only 10%. There was no difference in outcomes in patients who underwent AF ablation compared with those who did not undergo AF ablation. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of early rhythm control is mediated by the presence of sinus rhythm at 12 months in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial. Clinicians implementing ERC should aim for rapid and sustained restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with recently diagnosed AF and cardiovascular comorbidities.

Systematic, early rhythm control strategy for atrial fibrillation in patients with or without symptoms: the EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: Clinical practice guidelines restrict rhythm control therapy to patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The EAST-AFNET 4 trial demonstrated that early, systematic rhythm control improves clinical outcomes compared to symptom-directed rhythm control. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prespecified EAST-AFNET 4 analysis compared the effect of early rhythm control therapy in asymptomatic patients (EHRA score I) to symptomatic patients. Primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, or hospitalization with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome, analyzed in a time-to-event analysis. At baseline, 801/2633 (30.4%) patients were asymptomatic [mean age 71.3 years, 37.5% women, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.4, 169/801 (21.1%) heart failure]. Asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control (395/801) received similar rhythm control therapies compared to symptomatic patients [e.g. AF ablation at 24 months: 75/395 (19.0%) in asymptomatic; 176/910 (19.3%) symptomatic patients, P = 0.672]. Anticoagulation and treatment of concomitant cardiovascular conditions was not different between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. The primary outcome occurred in 79/395 asymptomatic patients randomized to early rhythm control and in 97/406 patients randomized to usual care (hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval [0.6; 1.03]), almost identical to symptomatic patients. At 24 months follow-up, change in symptom status was not different between randomized groups (P = 0.19). CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of early, systematic rhythm control was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients in EAST-AFNET 4. These results call for a shared decision discussing the benefits of rhythm control therapy in all patients with recently diagnosed AF and concomitant cardiovascular conditions (EAST-AFNET 4; ISRCTN04708680; NCT01288352; EudraCT2010-021258-20).

Early Rhythm Control Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Even on optimal therapy, many patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation experience cardiovascular complications. Additional treatments are needed to reduce these events, especially in patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. METHODS: This prespecified subanalysis of the randomized EAST-AFNET4 trial (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) assessed the effect of systematic, early rhythm control therapy (ERC; using antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter ablation) compared with usual care (allowing rhythm control therapy to improve symptoms) on the 2 primary outcomes of the trial and on selected secondary outcomes in patients with heart failure, defined as heart failure symptoms New York Heart Association II to III or left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <50%. RESULTS: This analysis included 798 patients (300 [37.6%] female, median age 71.0 [64.0, 76.0] years, 785 with known LVEF). The majority of patients (n=442) had heart failure and preserved LVEF (LVEF≥50%; mean LVEF 61±6.3%), the others had heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (n=211; LVEF 40%-49%; mean LVEF 44 ± 2.9%) or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=132; LVEF<40%; mean LVEF 31±5.5%). Over the 5.1-year median follow-up, the composite primary outcome of cardiovascular death, stroke, or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure or for acute coronary syndrome occurred less often in patients randomly assigned to ERC (94/396; 5.7 per 100 patient-years) compared with patients randomly assigned to usual care (130/402; 7.9 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.74 [0.56-0.97]; P=0.03), not altered by heart failure status (interaction P value=0.63). The primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events related to rhythm control therapy) occurred in 71 of 396 (17.9%) patients with heart failure randomly assigned to ERC and in 87 of 402 (21.6%) patients with heart failure randomly assigned to usual care (hazard ratio, 0.85 [0.62-1.17]; P=0.33). LVEF improved in both groups (LVEF change at 2 years: ERC 5.3±11.6%, usual care 4.9±11.6%, P=0.43). ERC also improved the composite outcome of death or hospitalization for worsening of heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Rhythm control therapy conveys clinical benefit when initiated within 1 year of diagnosing atrial fibrillation in patients with signs or symptoms of heart failure. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01288352. URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN04708680. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu; Unique identifier: 2010-021258-20.

Effect of adaptive servo ventilation on central sleep apnea and sleep structure in systolic heart failure patients: polysomnography data from the SERVE-HF major sub study.

This SERVE-HF (Treatment of Predominant Central Sleep Apnea by Adaptive Servo Ventilation in Patients With Heart Failure) sub study analysis evaluated polysomnography (PSG) data in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and predominant central sleep apnea (CSA) randomised to guideline-based medical therapy, with or without adaptive servo ventilation (ASV). Patients underwent full overnight PSG at baseline and at 12 months. All PSG recordings were analysed by a core laboratory. Only data for patients with baseline and 3- or 12-month values were included. The sub study included 312 patients; the number with available PSG data differed for each variable (94-103 in the control group, 77-99 in the ASV group). After 12 months, baseline-adjusted respiratory measures were significantly better in the ASV group versus control. Although some between-group differences in sleep measures were seen at 12 months (e.g., better sleep efficiency in the ASV group), these were unlikely to be clinically significant. The number of periodic leg movements during sleep (PLMS) increased in the ASV group (p = 0.039). At 12 months, the respiratory arousal index was significantly lower in the ASV versus control group (p < 0.001), whilst the PLMS-related arousal index was significantly higher in the ASV group (p = 0.04 versus control). ASV attenuated the respiratory variables characterising sleep apnea in patients with HFrEF and predominant CSA in SERVE-HF. Sleep quality improvements during ASV therapy were small and unlikely to be clinically significant. The increase in PLMS and PLMS-related arousals during ASV warrants further investigation, particularly relating to their potential association with increased cardiovascular risk.

Anticoagulation, therapy of concomitant conditions, and early rhythm control therapy: a detailed analysis of treatment patterns in the EAST - AFNET 4 trial.

AIMS: Treatment patterns were compared between randomized groups in EAST-AFNET 4 to assess whether differences in anticoagulation, therapy of concomitant diseases, or intensity of care can explain the clinical benefit achieved with early rhythm control in EAST-AFNET 4. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiovascular treatment patterns and number of visits were compared between randomized groups in EAST-AFNET 4. Oral anticoagulation was used in >90% of patients during follow-up without differences between randomized groups. There were no differences in treatment of concomitant conditions between groups. The type of rhythm control varied by country and centre. Over time, antiarrhythmic drugs were given to 1171/1395 (84%) patients in early therapy, and to 202/1394 (14%) in usual care. Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation was performed in 340/1395 (24%) patients randomized to early therapy, and in 168/1394 (12%) patients randomized to usual care. 97% of rhythm control therapies were within class I and class III recommendations of AF guidelines. Patients randomized to early therapy transmitted 297 166 telemetric electrocardiograms (ECGs) to a core lab. In total, 97 978 abnormal ECGs were sent to study sites. The resulting difference between study visits was low (0.06 visits/patient/year), with slightly more visits in early therapy (usual care 0.39 visits/patient/year; early rhythm control 0.45 visits/patient/year, P < 0.001), mainly due to visits for symptomatic AF recurrences or recurrent AF on telemetric ECGs. CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of early, systematic rhythm control therapy was achieved using variable treatment patterns of antiarrhythmic drugs and AF ablation, applied within guideline recommendations.

Incidence and risk factors of mental disorders in the elderly: The European MentDis_ICF65+ study.

OBJECTIVE: While incidence rates of depression and anxiety disorders in the elderly have been comprehensively investigated, the incidence rates of other mental disorders have rarely been researched. The incidence rate and predictors of various mental disorders in the elderly were evaluated in different European and associated countries. METHODS: A cross-sectional and longitudinal multi-centre survey of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.) diagnoses was conducted in different European and associated countries (Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Israel) to collect data on the prevalence and incidence of mental disorders in the elderly. The sample size of the longitudinal wave was N = 2592 elderly. RESULTS: The overall 1-year incidence rate for any mental disorder in the elderly is 8.65%. At 5.18%, any anxiety disorder had the highest incidence rate across all diagnostic groups. The incidence rate for any affective disorder was 2.97%. The lowest incidence rates were found for agoraphobia (1.37%) and panic disorder (1.30%). Risk factors for the development of any mental disorder were never having been married, no religious affiliation, a higher number of physical illnesses and a lower quality of life. CONCLUSION: In comparison to other studies, lower incidence rates for any affective disorder and middle-range incidence for any anxiety disorder were found. To the authors' knowledge, no prior studies have reported 1-year incidence rates for somatoform disorder, bipolar disorder and substance misuse in community-dwelling elderly. These findings indicate the need to raise awareness of psychosocial problems in the elderly and to ensure adequate availability of mental health services.

Health-Related Quality of Life and mental health of families with children and adolescents affected by rare diseases and high disease burden: the perspective of affected children and their siblings.

BACKGROUND: Advances in genetic and pharmaceutical technology and pediatric care have enabled treatment options for an increasing number of rare diseases in affected children. However, as current treatment options are primarily of palliative nature, the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and mental health of this impaired population and their siblings are of increasing importance. Among children and adolescents with rare diseases, those who are technology-dependent carry a high disease burden and are selected as the target population in our study. In a cross-sectional observational design, the children's HRQoL was assessed with the DISABKIDS (DCGM-37) as well as KIDSCREEN-27, while mental health was assessed with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) by both the affected children, their parents, and siblings. RESULTS: Results of the study sample were compared to normative data. Affected children scored significantly lower than the norm on almost all HRQoL subscales as reported by parent and child. From the parental perspective, more mental health subscales were significantly impaired compared to the child's perspective. Siblings showed no impairment in HRQoL as well as significantly fewer behavioral problems and higher prosocial behavior regarding their mental health compared to the norm. CONCLUSION: Children and adolescents with rare diseases seem particularly impaired in social and emotional aspects of HRQoL and mental health. Interventions may focus primarily on promoting social skills, fostering prosocial behavior and peer relationships.

The moderating effects of social support and depressive symptoms on pain among elderly multimorbid patients-data from the multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study MultiCare.

OBJECTIVES: Depressive symptoms and chronic pain are common among patients with multimorbidity creating a complex medical condition for both the patient and the general practitioner. Perceived social support may function as a protective measure.To examine the impact of perceived social support as a potential moderator between depressive symptoms and pain intensity and pain disability in daily activities in multimorbid patients aged 75+. METHOD: Data from 3,189 patients of the German longitudinal cohort study MultiCare were obtained at baseline and follow-ups during 5 years. Multilevel linear mixed-effects analyses were conducted for pain intensity (model 1) and pain disability in daily activities (model 2). The interaction term social support by depression score was included to test for moderation. RESULTS: The interaction between social support and depressive symptoms was significantly associated with the pain intensity score 0.41 (SE=.17; 95-CI[.08;.74]) but not with the pain disability score 0.35 (SE=.19; 95-CI[-.01;.72]). Additionally, men and individuals with medium or higher educational level showed reduced pain intensity and disability scores. Pain disability scores increased with age and depressive symptoms. Increased pain scores were also found for body mass index and burden of multimorbidity. CONCLUSION: Perceived social support amplified the association of depressive symptoms on pain intensity and did not show a protective function. The high scores of perceived social support among the participants may point to the practice of secondary gain due to the patients immense health burden.

Predictors of change in depressive symptoms in older and multimorbid patients: a longitudinal analysis of the multicare cohort.

BACKGROUND: Depression in older adults is becoming an increasing concern. As depressive symptoms change over time, it is important to understand the determinants of change in depressive symptoms. The aim of our study is to use a longitudinal study design to explore the predictors of change, remission and incident depression in older patients with multimorbidity. METHODS: Data from the MultiCare cohort study were used. The cohort studied 3,189 multimorbid general practice patients aged 65-85. Data were collected during personal interviews. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). Predictors of change in depressive symptoms were determined using multivariate linear regression, while multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze predictors of remission and incident depression. Models included depressive symptoms at baseline and follow-up, socio-demographics and data on health status and social support. RESULTS: Overall, 2,746 participants with complete follow-up data were analyzed. Mean age was 74.2 years, 59.2% were female, and 11.3% were classified as depressed at baseline. Burden of multimorbidity and social support were statistically significant predictors in all regression analyses. Further predictors of change in depressive symptoms were: income, pain, nursing grade, self-rated health and self-efficacy. LIMITATIONS: The sample size for prediction of remission limited statistical certainty. Assessment of depressive symptoms using GDS-15 differs from routine clinical diagnoses of depression. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of change in depressive symptoms in older multimorbid patients are similar to those predicting remission and incident depression, and do not seem to differ significantly from other older patient populations with depressive symptoms.

The First Year of Noninvasive Remote Telemonitoring in Chronic Heart Failure Is not Cost Saving but Improves Quality of Life: The Randomized Controlled CardioBBEAT Trial.

Introduction: Remote telemonitoring (RTM) for patients with chronic heart failure (HF) holds promise to improve prognosis and well-being beyond the standard of care (SoC). The CardioBBEAT trial assessed the health economic and clinical impact of an interactive bidirectional RTM system (Motiva®) versus SoC for patients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), in Germany. Methods: This multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled 621 patients with HFrEF (mean age 63.0 ± 11.5 years, 88% men). The primary endpoint was the integrated effect of the intervention on total costs and nonhospitalized days alive after 12 months, reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Costs (in k€) were based on actual charges of patients' statutory health insurance. Among secondary outcome measures were mortality and disease-specific quality of life. Results: We found a neutral effect on nonhospitalized days alive (RTM mean 341 ± 59 days, SoC 346 ± 45 days; p = 0.298) associated with increased total costs (RTM 18.5 ± 39.5 k€, SoC 12.8 ± 22.0 k€; p = 0.046). This yielded an ICER of -1.15 k€/day. RTM did not impact mortality risk. All quality of life scales were consistently and meaningfully improved in the RTM group at 12 months compared to SoC (all p < 0.01). Conclusions: The first 12 months of RTM were not cost-effective compared to SoC in patients with HFrEF, but associated with a relevant improvement in disease-specific quality of life. The balanced assessment of the potential benefit of RTM requires integration of both the societal and patient perspective. ClinTrials.gov (NCT02293252).

Preventive or Deferred Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and Implantable Defibrillator (BERLIN VT): A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) reduces the recurrence of VT in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The appropriate timing of VT ablation and its effects on mortality and heart failure progression remain a matter of debate. In patients with life-threatening arrhythmias necessitating ICD implantation, we compared outcomes of preventive VT ablation (undertaken before ICD implantation to prevent ICD shocks for VT) and deferred ablation after 3 ICD shocks for VT. METHODS: The BERLIN VT study (Preventive Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Myocardial Infarction) was a prospective, open, parallel, randomized trial performed at 26 centers. Patients with stable ischemic cardiomyopathy, a left ventricular ejection fraction between 30% and 50%, and documented VT were randomly assigned 1:1 to a preventive or deferred ablation strategy. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for either symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia or worsening heart failure. Secondary outcomes included sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia and appropriate ICD therapy. We hypothesized that preventive ablation strategy would be superior to deferred ablation strategy in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 396±284 days, the primary end point occurred in 25 (32.9%) of 76 patients in the preventive ablation group and 23 (27.7%) of 83 patients in the deferred ablation group (hazard ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.62-1.92]; P=0.77). On the basis of prespecified criteria for interim analyses, the study was terminated early for futility. In the preventive versus deferred ablation group, 6 versus 2 patients died (7.9% versus 2.4%; P=0.18), 8 versus 2 patients were admitted for worsening heart failure (10.4% versus 2.3%; P=0.062), and 15 versus 21 patients were hospitalized for symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia (19.5% versus 25.3%; P=0.27). Among secondary outcomes, the proportions of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia (39.7% versus 48.2%; P=0.050) and appropriate ICD therapy (34.2% versus 47.0%; P=0.020) were numerically reduced in the preventive ablation group. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive VT ablation before ICD implantation did not reduce mortality or hospitalization for arrhythmia or worsening heart failure during 1 year of follow-up compared with the deferred ablation strategy. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02501005.

Do Children With Functional Abdominal Pain Benefit More From a Pain-Specific Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention Than From an Unspecific Attention Control Intervention? Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) among children with functional abdominal pain with an attention control (AC), hypothesizing the superiority of CBT group intervention regarding pain intensity (primary outcome), pain duration and frequency (further primary outcomes), functional disability, and quality of life and coping strategies (key secondary outcomes). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled efficacy trial (RCT) with 4 time points (before intervention, after intervention, 3-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up). One hundred twenty-seven children aged 7-12 years were randomized to either the CBT (n = 63; 55.6% girls) or the AC (n = 64; 57.8% girls). RESULTS: Primary endpoint analysis of the logarithmized area under the pain intensity curve showed no significant difference between groups (mean reduction = 49.04%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -19.98%-78.36%). Treatment success rates were comparable (adjusted odds ratio = 0.53, 95% CI 0.21-1.34, number needed to treat = 16). However, time trend analyses over the course of 1 year revealed a significantly greater reduction in pain intensity (40.9%, 95% CI 2.7%-64.1%) and pain duration (43.6%, 95% CI 6.2%-66.1%) in the CBT compared with the AC, but not in pain frequency per day (1.2, 95% CI -2.7 to 5.2). In the long term, children in the CBT benefitted slightly more than those in the AC with respect to functional disability, quality of life, and coping strategies. DISCUSSION: Both interventions were effective, which underlines the role of time and attention for treatment efficacy. However, in the longer term, CBT yielded more favorable results.

Prognostic markers of all-cause mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation: data from the prospective long-term registry of the German Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET).

AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular death, even on anticoagulation. It is controversial, which conditions-including concomitant diseases and AF itself-contribute to this mortality. To further clarify these questions, major determinants of long-term mortality and their contribution to death were quantified in an unselected cohort of AF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We established a large nationwide registry comprising 8833 AF-patients with a median follow-up of 6.5 years (45 345 patient-years) and central adjudication of adverse events. Baseline characteristics of the patients were evaluated as predictors of mortality using Cox regression and C-indices for determination of predictive power. Annualized mortality was highest in the first year (6.2%) and remained high thereafter (5.2% in men and 5.5% in women). Thirty-eight percent of all deaths were cardiovascular, mainly due to heart failure or sudden death. Sex-specific age was the strongest predictor of mortality, followed by concomitant cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular conditions. These factors accounted for 25% of the total mortality beyond age and sex and for 84% of the mortality differences between AF types. Thus, the electrical phenotype of the disease at baseline contributed only marginally to prediction of mortality. CONCLUSION: Mortality is high in AF patients and arises primarily from heart failure, peripheral artery disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes mellitus, which, therefore, should be targeted to lower mortality. Parameters related to the electrical manifestation of AF did not have an independent impact on long-term mortality in our representative cohort.

Shared decision making and patient-centeredness for patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus in primary care-results of the cluster-randomised controlled DEBATE trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigate whether an educational intervention of GPs increases patient-centeredness and perceived shared decision making in the treatment of patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus? METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized controlled trial in German primary care. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus defined as HbA1c levels ≥ 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) at the time of recruitment (n = 833) from general practitioners (n = 108) were included. Outcome measures included subjective shared decision making (SDM-Q-9; scale from 0 to 45 (high)) and patient-centeredness (PACIC-D; scale from 1 to 5 (high)) as secondary outcomes. Data collection was performed before intervention (baseline, T0), at 6 months (T1), at 12 months (T2), at 18 months (T3), and at 24 months (T4) after baseline. RESULTS: Subjective shared decision making decreased in both groups during the course of the study (intervention group: -3.17 between T0 and T4 (95% CI: -4.66, -1.69; p < 0.0001) control group: -2.80 (95% CI: -4.30, -1.30; p = 0.0003)). There were no significant differences between the two groups (-0.37; 95% CI: -2.20, 1.45; p = 0.6847). The intervention's impact on patient-centeredness was minor. Values increased in both groups, but the increase was not statistically significant, nor was the difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention did not increase patient perceived subjective shared decision making and patient-centeredness in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Effects in both groups might be partially attributed to the Hawthorne-effect. Future trials should focus on patient-based intervention elements to investigate effects on shared decision making and patient-centeredness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on March 10th, 2011 at ISRCTN registry under the reference ISRCTN70713571 .