Feasibility of the cardiac output response to stress test in suspected heart failure patients.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic tools available to support general practitioners diagnose heart failure (HF) are limited. OBJECTIVES: (i) Determine the feasibility of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test in suspected HF patients, and (ii) Identify differences in the CORS results between (a) confirmed HF patients from non-HF patients, and (b) HF reduced (HFrEF) vs HF preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction. METHODS: Single centre, prospective, observational, feasibility study. Consecutive patients with suspected HF (N = 105; mean age: 72 ± 10 years) were recruited from specialized HF diagnostic clinics in secondary care. The consultant cardiologist confirmed or refuted a HF diagnosis. The patient completed the CORS but the researcher administering the test was blinded from the diagnosis. The CORS assessed cardiac function (stroke volume index, SVI) noninvasively using the bioreactance technology at rest-supine, challenge-standing, and stress-step exercise phases. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients were newly diagnosed with HF (HFrEF, n = 21) with 79% being able to complete all phases of the CORS (91% of non-HF patients). A 17% lower SVI was found in HF compared with non-HF patients at rest-supine (43 ± 15 vs 51 ± 16 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and stress-step exercise phase (49 ± 16 vs 58 ± 17 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02). HFrEF patients demonstrated a lower SVI at rest (39 ± 15 vs 48 ± 13 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and challenge-standing phase (34 ± 9 vs 42 ± 12 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.03) than HFpEF patients. CONCLUSION: The CORS is feasible and patients with HF responded differently to non-HF, and HFrEF from HFpEF. These findings provide further evidence for the potential use of the CORS to improve HF diagnostic and referral accuracy in primary care.

Heart failure (HF) is a global pandemic affecting 26 million people worldwide with an estimated 1 million people in the United Kingdom. Accurate early diagnosis of HF and the initiation of evidence-based treatment is essential to reduce morbidity and mortality and the associated burden on healthcare. As there are no state-of-the-art approaches, early diagnosis is challenging and often inaccurate, as initial signs and symptoms are nonspecific. We have developed an innovative test, named CORS (cardiac output response to stress test), to help general practitioners identify HF, which uses a method similar to an electrocardiogram and measures heart function at rest and during short step exercise. We recruited suspected HF patients from specialist HF diagnostic clinics in secondary care to complete the CORS test. We successfully demonstrated that 79% of patients with newly diagnosed HF (n = 38) and 91% of non-HF patients (n = 67) were able to complete all phases of the CORS test. Our findings demonstrate that newly diagnosed HF patients are able to complete this test, which provides further evidence for the potential use of the CORS test to improve HF diagnostic and referral accuracy in primary care.

Outcomes in patients treated with loop diuretics without a diagnosis of heart failure: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are commonly prescribed in the community, not always to patients with a recorded diagnosis of heart failure (HF). The rate of HF events in patients prescribed loop diuretics without a diagnosis of HF is unknown. METHODS: This was a propensity-matched cohort study using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episode Statistics and Office of National Statistics in the UK. Patients prescribed a loop diuretic without a diagnosis of HF (loop diuretic group) between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 were compared with patients with HF (HF group)-analysis A, and patients with risk factors for HF (either ischaemic heart disease, or diabetes and hypertension-at-risk group)-analysis B. The primary endpoint was an HF event (a composite of presentation with HF symptoms, HF hospitalisation, HF diagnosis (analysis B only) and all-cause mortality). RESULTS: From a total population of 180 384 patients (78 968 in the loop diuretic group, 28 177 in the HF group and 73 239 in the at-risk group), there were 59 694 patients, 22 352 patients and 57 219 patients in the loop diuretic, HF and at-risk groups, respectively, after exclusion criteria were applied. After propensity matching for age, sex and comorbidities, patients in the loop diuretic group had a similar rate of HF events as those in the HF group (71.9% vs 72.1%; HR=0.92 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.94); p<0.001), and twice as those in the at-risk group (59.2% vs 35.7%; HR=2.04 (95% CI 2.00 to 2.08); p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients prescribed a loop diuretic without a recorded diagnosis of HF experience HF events at a rate comparable with that of patients with a recorded diagnosis of HF; many of these patients may have undiagnosed HF.

Predicting incident heart failure from population-based nationwide electronic health records: protocol for a model development and validation study.

INTRODUCTION: Heart failure (HF) is increasingly common and associated with excess morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Treatment of HF can alter the disease trajectory and reduce clinical events in HF. However, many cases of HF remain undetected until presentation with more advanced symptoms, often requiring hospitalisation. Predicting incident HF is challenging and statistical models are limited by performance and scalability in routine clinical practice. An HF prediction model implementable in nationwide electronic health records (EHRs) could enable targeted diagnostics to enable earlier identification of HF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will investigate a range of development techniques (including logistic regression and supervised machine learning methods) on routinely collected primary care EHRs to predict risk of new-onset HF over 1, 5 and 10 years prediction horizons. The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)-GOLD dataset will be used for derivation (training and testing) and the CPRD-AURUM dataset for external validation. Both comprise large cohorts of patients, representative of the population of England in terms of age, sex and ethnicity. Primary care records are linked at patient level to secondary care and mortality data. The performance of the prediction model will be assessed by discrimination, calibration and clinical utility. We will only use variables routinely accessible in primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Permissions for CPRD-GOLD and CPRD-AURUM datasets were obtained from CPRD (ref no: 21_000324). The CPRD ethical approval committee approved the study. The results will be submitted as a research paper for publication to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at peer-reviewed conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: The study was registered on Clinical Trials.gov (NCT05756127). A systematic review for the project was registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022380892).

A polygenic risk score added to a QRISK®2 cardiovascular disease risk calculator demonstrated robust clinical acceptance and clinical utility in the primary care setting.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to assess the real-world feasibility, acceptability, and impact of an integrated risk tool for cardiovascular disease (CVD IRT, combining the standard QRISK®2 risk algorithm with a polygenic risk score), implemented within routine primary practice in the UK National Health Service. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Healthcare Evaluation of Absolute Risk Testing Study (NCT05294419) evaluated participants undergoing primary care health checks. Both QRISK2 and CVD IRT scores were returned to the healthcare providers (HCPs), who then communicated the results to participants. The primary outcome of the study was feasibility of CVD IRT implementation. Secondary outcomes included changes in CVD risk (QRISK2 vs. CVD IRT) and impact of the CVD IRT on clinical decision-making. A total of 832 eligible participants (median age 55 years, 62% females, 97.5% White ethnicity) were enrolled across 12 UK primary care practices. Cardiovascular disease IRT scores were obtained on 100% of the blood samples. Healthcare providers stated that the CVD IRT could be incorporated into routine primary care in a straightforward manner in 90.7% of reports. Participants stated they were 'likely' or 'very likely' to recommend the use of this test to their family or friends in 86.9% of reports. Participants stated that the test was personally useful (98.8%) and that the results were easy to understand (94.6%). When CVD IRT exceeded QRISK2, HCPs planned changes in management for 108/388 (27.8%) of participants and 47% (62/132) of participants with absolute risk score changes of >2%. CONCLUSION: Amongst HCPs and participants who agreed to the trial of genetic data for refinement of clinical risk prediction in primary care, we observed that CVD IRT implementation was feasible and well accepted. The CVD IRT results were associated with planned changes in prevention strategies.

When a standard cardiovascular risk tool, as currently used in National Health Service Health Checks, was expanded to include genetic risk information, it was well accepted by both participants and healthcare providers and generated impactful changes in planned clinical decision-making.Most participants found the test useful and easy to understand, and healthcare providers found it straightforward to use in most cases.When risk was increased by the addition of genetic information, this influenced planned management decisions.

"It's Somebody else's responsibility" - perceptions of general practitioners, heart failure nurses, care home staff, and residents towards heart failure diagnosis and management for older people in long-term care: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Older people in care-facilities may be less likely to access gold standard diagnosis and treatment for heart failure (HF) than non residents; little is understood about the factors that influence this variability. This study aimed to examine the experiences and expectations of clinicians, care-facility staff and residents in interpreting suspected symptoms of HF and deciding whether and how to intervene. METHODS: This was a nested qualitative study using in-depth interviews with older residents with a diagnosis of heart failure (n=17), care-facility staff (n=8), HF nurses (n=3) and general practitioners (n=5). RESULTS: Participants identified a lack of clear lines of responsibility in providing HF care in care-facilities. Many clinical staff expressed negative assumptions about the acceptability and utility of interventions, and inappropriately moderated residents' access to HF diagnosis and treatment. Care-facility staff and residents welcomed intervention but experienced a lack of opportunity for dialogue about the balance of risks and benefits. Most residents wanted to be involved in healthcare decisions but physical, social and organisational barriers precluded this. An onsite HF service offered a potential solution and proved to be acceptable to residents and care-facility staff. CONCLUSIONS: HF diagnosis and management is of variable quality in long-term care. Conflicting expectations and a lack of co-ordinated responsibility for care, contribute to a culture of benign neglect that excludes the wishes and needs of residents. A greater focus on rights, responsibilities and co-ordination may improve healthcare quality for older people in care. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN: ISRCTN19781227.

Inappropriate dosing of direct oral anticoagulants: findings from a clinical vignette study and physician survey.

Objective: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are first-line therapy for stroke prevention for 1.4 million atrial fibrillation (AF) patients in the UK. However, the rates of DOAC dosing below evidence-based recommendations are estimated between 9% and 22%. This study explores specific patient and physician factors associated with prescribing inappropriate DOAC underdoses. Methods: DOAC-prescribing physicians within the UK completed both a clinical vignette survey, which contained 12 hypothetical patient profiles designed to replicate DOAC prescribing scenarios, and a physician survey to capture sociodemographic, clinical experience, and prescriber-related beliefs and motivations related to DOAC prescribing. Eight patient factors based on a literature search and an expert consultation process were varied within the vignettes. Associations between the prescribers' dosing choices and patient factors were explored via multilevel logistic regression. The analysis is focused on the most frequently selected DOACs, apixaban and rivaroxaban, both of which have different dosing guidelines. Results: In all, 336 prescribers (69% male; 233/336) completed the survey, mostly general physicians (GPs) (45%) or cardiology specialists (36%) with a mean of 17.9 years' experience. Most prescribers (73%; 244/336) inappropriately underdosed at least once; rates between GPs and specialists were nearly identical. Patient factors most strongly associated with apixaban inappropriate underdosing included a history of major bleeding and falls. For rivaroxaban, these were major bleeding and severe frailty. Only 32% (106/335) of prescribers reported DOAC dosing guidelines as the sole influence on their prescribing behaviour. Among prescribers who did not inappropriately underdose, greater prescribing confidence was aligned to increased perception of inappropriate underdose risk. Conclusions: Overall, patient factors such as major bleeding and severe frailty were found to be associated with inappropriate underdosing of apixaban and rivaroxaban. Furthermore, prescribers who were more confident in DOAC prescribing, and were more worried about the risk of stroke, were significantly less likely to inappropriately underdose. These findings suggest that all prescribers, regardless of speciality, may benefit from education and training to raise awareness of the risks associated with inappropriate DOAC underdosing.

Feasibility of evidence-based diagnosis and management of heart failure in older people in care: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many older people in long-term care do not receive evidence-based diagnosis or management for heart failure; it is not known whether this can be achieved for this population. We initiated an onsite heart failure service, compared with 'usual care' with the aim of establishing the feasibility of accurate diagnosis and appropriate management. METHODS: A pilot randomised controlled trial which randomised residents from 33 care facilities in North-East England with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) to usual care or an onsite heart failure service. The primary outcome was the optimum prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-adrenergic antagonists at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 399 echocardiographically-screened residents aged 65-100 years, 30 subjects with LVSD were eligible; 28 (93%) consented and were randomised (HF service: 16; routine care: 12). Groups were similar at baseline; six month follow-up was completed for 25 patients (89%); 3 (11%) patients died. Results for the primary outcome were not statistically significant but there was a consistent pattern of increased drug use and titration to optimum dose in the intervention group (21% compared to 0% receiving routine care, p=0.250). Hospitalisation rates, quality of life and mortality at 6 months were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the feasibility of an on-site heart failure service for older long-term care populations. Optimisation of medication appeared possible without adversely affecting quality of life; this questions clinicians' concerns about adverse effects in this group. This has international implications for managing such patients. These methods should be replicated in a large-scale study to quantify the scale of benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN19781227 http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN19781227

Aspirin to target arterial events in chronic kidney disease (ATTACK): study protocol for a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel group trial of low-dose aspirin vs. standard care for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a very common long-term condition and powerful risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Low-dose aspirin is of proven benefit in the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in people with pre-existing CVD. However, in people without CVD, the rates of MI and stroke are much lower, and the benefits of aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD are largely balanced by an increased risk of bleeding. People with CKD are at greatly increased risk of CVD and so the absolute benefits of aspirin are likely to be greater than in lower-risk groups, even if the relative benefits are the same. Post hoc evidence suggests the relative benefits may be greater in the CKD population but the risk of bleeding may also be higher. A definitive study of aspirin for primary prevention in this high-risk group, recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2014, has never been conducted. The question has global significance given the rising burden of CKD worldwide and the low cost of aspirin. METHODS: ATTACK is a pragmatic multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint adjudication superiority trial of aspirin 75 mg daily vs. standard care for the primary prevention of CVD in 25,210 people aged 18 years and over with CKD recruited from UK Primary Care. Participants aged 18 years and over with CKD (GFR category G1-G4) will be identified in Primary Care and followed up using routinely collected data and annual questionnaires for an average of 5 years. The primary outcome is the time to first major vascular event (composite of non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke and cardiovascular death [excluding confirmed intracranial haemorrhage and other fatal cardiovascular haemorrhage]). Deaths from other causes (including fatal bleeding) will be treated as competing events. The study will continue until 1827 major vascular events have occurred. The principal safety outcome is major intracranial and extracranial bleeding; this is hypothesised to be increased in those randomised to take aspirin. The key consideration is then whether and to what extent the benefits of aspirin from the expected reduction in CVD events exceed the risks of major bleeding. DISCUSSION: This will be the first definitive trial of aspirin for primary CVD prevention in CKD patients. The research will be of great interest to clinicians, guideline groups and policy-makers, in the UK and globally, particularly given the high and rising prevalence of CKD that is driven by population ageing and epidemics of obesity and diabetes. The low cost of aspirin means that a positive result would be of relevance to low- and middle-income countries and the impact in the developed world less diluted by any inequalities in health care access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN40920200 . EudraCT: 2018-000644-26 . CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT03796156.

Age-dependent values of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide are superior to a single cut-point for ruling out suspected systolic dysfunction in primary care.

AIMS: The study evaluated the use of age-related decision limits for N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), for ruling out suspected systolic dysfunction in symptomatic patients in primary care, compared with the present standards. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were obtained from 5508 patients from 10 studies in the UK, New Zealand, Europe, and USA. All have had NT-proBNP analysis and echocardiography. The median age was 62 years (range 18-100 years) with a prevalence of reduced left ventricular systolic function (left ventricular ejection fraction < or =40%) of 18%. In a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, overall area under the curve (AUC) was 0.89. When looking at different age groups, AUC was highest (0.95) for <50 years, intermediate (0.90) for 50-75 years, and lowest (0.82) for >75 years. Using optimized decision limits, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values (NPVs) were: <50 years (50 ng/L): 99.2, 57.2, and 99.7%; 50-75 years (75 ng/L): 95.9, 51.0, and 96.8%; and >75 years (250 ng/L): 87.9, 53.7, and 92.4%, respectively. Using only a single decision value (125 ng/L for all ages) gave sensitivities of 89.1, 91.9, and 94.3%; specificities of 84.0, 69.1, and 29.3% and NPVs of 97.7, 97.6, and 93.4%. A decision value of 400 ng/L for all ages gave much lower sensitivities. CONCLUSION: In a large population of patients in primary care, the use of age-stratified NT-proBNP decision limits considerably improves performance over current standards, with an excellent NPV for exclusion of reduced left ventricular systolic function.

Opportunities and challenges of a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test to enhance diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the role of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS), test in the current diagnostic pathway for heart failure and the opportunities and challenges to potential implementation in primary care. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured in-depth interviews which were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from the interviews were analysed thematically using an inductive approach. SETTING: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen healthcare professionals (six males, eight females) from primary (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, healthcare assistant, practice managers) and secondary care (consultant cardiologists). RESULTS: Four themes relating to opportunities and challenges surrounding the implementation of the new diagnostic technology were identified. These reflected that the adoption of CORS test would be an advantage to primary care but the test had barriers to implementation which include: establishment of clinical utility, suitability for immobile patients and cost implication to GP practices. CONCLUSION: The development of a simple non-invasive clinical test to accelerate the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care maybe helpful to reduce unnecessary referrals to secondary care. The CORS test has the potential to serve this purpose; however, factors such as cost effectiveness, diagnostic accuracy and seamless implementation in primary care have to be fully explored.

Diagnosis and management of patients with heart failure in England.

The objective of this postal survey was to assess the services currently accessed by primary care trusts (PCTs) for patients with chronic heart failure. Of the 303 PCTs in England, 225 (74%) responded to the questionnaire. Natriuretic peptides were used by 61 (26%) PCTs, whereas direct access to echocardiography was available to 163 (72%) and heart failure clinics to 95 (42%). Heart failure services were led by a cardiologist in 138 (61%) main referring hospitals, an elderly care physician in 33 (15%), and other physicians in 50 (22%). In total, 138 (62%) PCTs had access to heart failure nurses and 40 (18%) used coronary heart disease nurses; in 13 (5%) PCTs, patients with heart failure were seen by practice nurses. This survey highlights the need for further research on the cost effectiveness of service models for diagnosing and managing heart failure. The evidence base behind heart failure nurses should support their wider availability. The question of who cares for patients with heart failure should be reflected more widely in specialist training programmes in both secondary and primary care.

Clinical practices and attitudes regarding the diagnosis and management of heart failure: findings from the CORE Needs Assessment Survey.

AIMS: CORE is a continuing medical education initiative designed to support the evidence-based management of heart failure (HF) in the primary and secondary care settings. The goal of the CORE Needs Assessment Survey is to describe current clinical practice patterns and attitudes among global stakeholders in HF care. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CORE Steering Committee guided the development of survey questions to assess clinical practice, confidence, and attitudes/perceptions among cardiologists, primary care physicians, and nurses involved in HF management. In total, 346 healthcare professionals from Australia (n = 59), Austria (n = 59), Canada (n = 60), Spain (n = 58), Sweden (n = 52), and the UK (n = 58) contributed survey data. Results revealed multiple gaps over the spectrum of HF care, including diagnosis (low recognition of the signs and symptoms of HF and limited use of diagnostic tests), treatment planning (underuse of recommended agents and subtherapeutic dosing), treatment monitoring and adjustment (lack of adherence to recommendations), and long-term management (low confidence in providing patient education). Although primary care and specialist physicians and nurses shared common unmet needs, healthcare professional-specific clinical gaps were also identified. CONCLUSIONS: The CORE Needs Assessment Survey provides timely data describing current clinical practices and attitudes among physicians and nurses regarding key aspects of HF care. These findings will be useful for guiding the development of interventions tailored to the specific educational needs of different provider types and designed to support the evidence-based care of patients with HF.

A novel cardiac output response to stress test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care.

AIMS: Primary care physicians lack access to an objective cardiac function test. This study for the first time describes a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care and investigates its reproducibility. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective observational study recruited 32 consecutive primary care patients (age, 63 ± 9 years; female, n = 18). Cardiac output was measured continuously using the bioreactance method in supine and standing positions and during two 3 min stages of a step-exercise protocol (10 and 15 steps per minute) using a 15 cm height bench. The CORS test was performed on two occasions, i.e. Test 1 and Test 2. There was no significant difference between repeated measures of cardiac output and stroke volume at supine standing and Stage 1 and Stage 2 step exercises (all P > 0.3). There was a significant positive relationship between Test 1 and Test 2 cardiac outputs (r = 0.92, P = 0.01 with coefficient of variation of 7.1%). The mean difference in cardiac output (with upper and lower limits of agreement) between Test 1 and Test 2 was 0.1 (-1.9 to 2.1) L/min, combining supine, standing, and step-exercise data. CONCLUSIONS: The CORS, as a novel test for objective evaluation of cardiac function, demonstrates acceptable reproducibility and can potentially be implemented in primary care.

Recent advances in angina management: implications for nurses.

This article describes the physiology of the heart and the pathophysiology of angina. Diagnosis and treatment options, including pharmacological therapies, are outlined. The authors also discuss cardiac rehabilitation programmes and the extended role of nurses in managing patients with angina.

The diagnostic accuracy and utility of a B-type natriuretic peptide test in a community population of patients with suspected heart failure.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines suggest the use of natriuretic peptides in suspected heart failure but there have been no studies comparing assays in primary care. AIM: To test and compare the diagnostic accuracy and utility of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT proBNP) in diagnosing heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with suspected heart failure referred by GPs to one-stop diagnostic clinics. DESIGN OF STUDY: Community cohort, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: One-stop diagnostic clinics in Darlington Memorial and Bishop Auckland General Hospitals and general practices in South Durham. SUBJECTS: Two hundred and ninety-seven consecutive patients with symptoms and signs suggestive of heart failure referred from general practice. METHOD: The study measured sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and area under receiver operating characteristic curve for BNP (near patient assay) and NT proBNP (laboratory assay) in diagnosis of heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The NPV of both assays was determined as a potential method of reducing the number of referrals for echocardiography. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen of the 297 patients had left ventricular systolic dysfunction (38%). At the manufacturer's recommended cut-off of 100 pg/ml BNP gave a NPV of 82%. BNP performed better at a cut-off of 40 pg/ml with a NPV of 88%. At a cut-off of 150 pg/ml, NT proBNP gave a NPV of 92%. Using cut-offs of 40 pg/ml and 150 pg/ml for BNP and NT pro-BNP, respectively, could have prevented 24% and 25% of referrals to the clinic, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this setting, NT pro-BNP performed marginally better than BNP, and would be easier to use practically in primary care. A satisfactory cut-off has been identified, which needs validating in general practice. NT pro-BNP could be used to select referrals to a heart failure clinic or for echocardiography. This process needs testing in real-life general practice.

The Impact of Childhood Acute Otitis Media on Parental Quality of Life in a Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Acute otitis media (AOM) not only affects childhood quality of life (QoL), but can also affect parental QoL. We adapted a previously published questionnaire on the effect of childhood recurrent ear, nose and throat infections on parental QoL for use with AOM and used it in an observational, multicentre, prospective study of children with AOM. METHODS: The AOM-specific parental QoL questionnaire grouped 15 items into emotional, daily disturbance, total and overall parental QoL impact scores. The questionnaire was assessed using item-convergent and item-discriminant validity criteria and internal consistency reliability; and then used with parents of children aged <6 years diagnosed with AOM at 73 practices in Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK. Bivariate analyses explored the differences in mean parental QoL impact scores by various characteristics. RESULTS: The questionnaire demonstrated good to excellent internal consistency reliability for the various components (Cronbach's α 0.82-0.97). There were 1419 AOM episodes among 5882 healthy children over 1 year, of which 1063 episodes (74.9%) among 852 children had a questionnaire. Parents reported interrupted sleep (68.4%), worry (51.0%), altered daily schedule (44.6%) and less leisure time (41.5%) with a score ≥ 3 (1 = least to 5 = most impact). Factors that adversely affected parental QoL included: increased parental perception of AOM severity, younger child age and multiple AOM episodes. CONCLUSIONS: The AOM-specific parental QoL questionnaire demonstrated good performance across five European countries. Parental QoL was affected by childhood AOM proportionally to severity, number of episodes and younger child age.

The non-anticoagulation costs of atrial fibrillation management: findings from an observational study in NHS Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) management represents a significant burden on the UK NHS. Understanding this burden will be important in informing future health care planning and policy development. AIM: To describe the non-anticoagulation costs associated with AF management in routine UK clinical practice. MATERIALS PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study of 825 patients with AF undertaken in eight UK primary care practices. Data collected from routine clinical and prescribing records of all eligible, consenting patients, for a period of up to 3 years. The first 12 weeks following diagnosis was defined as the 'initiation phase'; the period after week 12 was defined as the 'maintenance phase'. RESULTS: Mean (SD) total cost of AF management was £941 (£1094) per patient in the initiation phase and £426 (£597) per patient-year in the maintenance phase. AF-related inpatient admissions contributed most to total costs; the mean (SD) total cost per patient in the initiation phase was £2285 (£900) for admitted and £278 (£252) for non-admitted patients. Mean maintenance phase costs per year were £1323 (£755) and £168 (£234), respectively, for admitted and non-admitted patients. Significant patient variables contributing to high cost in the initiation phase were hypertension and younger patient age, although only accounting for 6% of cost variability. Significant variables in the maintenance phase (18% of cost variability) were the presence of congestive heart failure, structural heart disease or diabetes and the frequency of day case admissions, ECGs and hospitalisations in the initiation phase. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient admissions contributed most to total AF management costs. Given the burden of hospital care, future work should focus on evaluating the appropriateness and reasons for hospitalisation in patients with AF and the factors affecting length of stay, with the aim of identifying opportunities to safely reduce inpatient costs. A number of significant patient characteristics and initiation phase variables were identified, which accounted for 18% of the variability in total maintenance phase costs. However, none of these could adequately predict high maintenance phase costs.

Barriers to accurate diagnosis and effective management of heart failure have not changed in the past 10 years: a qualitative study and national survey.

OBJECTIVES: To explore changes in healthcare professionals' views about the diagnosis and management of heart failure since a study in 2003. DESIGN: Focus groups and a national online cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups (n=8 with a total of 56 participants) were conducted in the North East of England using a phenomenological framework and purposive sampling, informing a UK online survey (n=514). RESULTS: 4 categories were identified as contributing to variations in the diagnosis and management of heart failure. Three previously known categories included: uncertainty about clinical practice, the value of clinical guidelines and tensions between individual and organisational practice. A new category concerned uncertainty about end-of-life care. Survey responses found that confidence varied among professional groups in diagnosing left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD): 95% of cardiologists, 93% of general physicians, 66% of general practitioners (GPs) and 32% of heart failure nurses. For heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), confidence levels were much lower: 58% of cardiologists, 43% of general physicians, 7% of GPs and 6% of heart failure nurses. Only 5-35% of respondents used natriuretic peptides for LVSD or HFpEF. Confidence in interpreting test findings was fundamental to the use of all diagnostic tests. Clinical guidelines were reported to be helpful when diagnosing LVSD by 33% of nurses and 50-56% of other groups, but fell to 5-28% for HFpEF. Some GPs did not routinely initiate diuretics (23%), ACE-inhibitors (22%) or ß-blockers (38%) for LVSD for reasons including historical teaching, perceived side effects and burden of monitoring. For end-of-life care, there was no consensus about responsibility for heart failure management. CONCLUSIONS: Reported differences in the way heart failure is diagnosed and managed have changed little in the past decade. Variable access to diagnostic tests, modes of care delivery and non-uniform management approaches persist. The current National Health Service (NHS) context may not be conducive to addressing these issues.