Hospital at Home as a Treatment Strategy for Worsening Heart Failure.

Hospital at home (HaH) is an innovative care model that may be particularly suited for heart failure (HF). Outpatient visits and inpatient care have been the 2 traditional settings for HF care, yet may not match the social and medical needs of patients at all times. Alternative models such as HaH may represent an effective and patient-centered option for select patients with worsening HF. To date, limited research in HF and other disease states has supported HaH as being safe and lower cost than traditional inpatient admission. Supporting HaH are new payment structures, such as Medicare's Acute Hospital Care at Home waiver program. In combination with outpatient visits, outpatient intravenous diuretic clinics, inpatient care, and cardiac intensive care, HaH could be a core component of a comprehensive care model with the potential to match resource utilization with the needs of patients across the spectrum of HF severity, and improve patient outcomes.

Health Status Disparities by Sex, Race/Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status in Outpatients With Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe the health status of outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) by sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES). BACKGROUND: Although a primary goal in treating patients with HFrEF is to optimize health status, whether disparities by sex, race/ethnicity, and SES exist is unknown. METHODS: In the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry, the associations among sex, race, and SES and health status, as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-overall summary (KCCQ-os) score (range 0 to 100; higher scores indicate better health status) was compared among 3,494 patients from 140 U.S. clinics. SES was categorized by total household income. Hierarchical multivariate linear regression estimated differences in KCCQ-os score after adjusting for 31 patient characteristics and 10 medications. RESULTS: Overall mean KCCQ-os scores were 64.2 ± 24.0 but lower for women (29% of sample; 60.3 ± 24.0 vs. 65.9 ± 24.0, respectively; p < 0.001), for blacks (60.5 ± 25.0 vs. 64.9 ± 23.0, respectively; p < 0.001), for Hispanics (59.1 ± 21.0 vs. 64.9 ± 23.0, respectively; p < 0.001), and for those with the lowest income (<$25,000; mean: 57.1 vs. 63.1 to 74.7 for other income categories; p < 0.001). Fully adjusted KCCQ-os scores were 2.2 points lower for women (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.8 to -0.6; p = 0.007), no different for blacks (p = 0.74), 4.0 points lower for Hispanics (95% CI: -6.6 to -1.3; p = 0.003), and lowest in the poorest patients (4.7 points lower than those with the highest income (95% CI: 0.1 to 9.2; p = 0.045; p for trend = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Among outpatients with HFrEF, women, blacks, Hispanics, and poorer patients had worse health status, which remained significant for women, Hispanics, and poorer patients in fully adjusted analyses. This suggests an opportunity to further optimize treatment to reduce these observed disparities.

Health Status Variation Across Practices in Outpatients With Heart Failure: Insights From the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Although a key treatment goal for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is to optimize their health status (their symptoms, function, and quality of life), the variability across outpatient practices in achieving this goal is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry, associations between baseline practice characteristics and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) Overall Summary (OS) and Symptom Frequency (SF) scores were assessed in 3494 patients across 140 US practices using hierarchical regression after accounting for 23 patient and 11 treatment characteristics. We then calculated an adjusted median odds ratio to quantify the average difference in likelihood that a patient would have excellent (KCCQ-OS, ≥75) health status or minimal (monthly or fewer) symptoms (KCCQ-SF, ≥75) when treated at one practice versus another, at random. The mean (±SD) KCCQ-OS and KCCQ-SF were 64.2±24 and 68.9±25.6, with 40% (n=1380) and 50% (n=1760) having KCCQ scores ≥75, respectively. The adjusted median odds ratio across practices, for KCCQ-OS ≥75, was 1.70 (95% confidence interval, 1.54-1.99; P<0.001) indicating a median 70% higher odds of a patient having good-to-excellent health status when treated at one random practice versus another. In regard to KCCQ-SF, the adjusted median odds ratio for KCCQ-SF ≥75 was 1.54 (95% confidence interval, 1.41-1.76; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, contemporary registry of outpatients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, we observed significant practice-level variability in patients' health status. Quantifying patients' health status as a measure of quality should be explored as a foundation for improving care. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.centerwatch.com. Unique identifier: TX144901.

Prospective Assessment of Frailty Using the Fried Criteria in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy.

Frail patients are more prone to adverse events after cardiac surgery, particularly after implantation of left ventricular assist devices. Thus, frailty assessment may help identify patients unlikely to benefit from left ventricular assist device therapy. The purpose was to establish a suitable measure of frailty in adults with end-stage heart failure. In a prospective cohort of 75 patients (age 58 ± 12 years) with end-stage heart failure, we assessed the association between frailty (5-component Fried criteria) and the composite primary outcome of inpatient mortality or prolonged length of stay, as well as extubation status, time on ventilator, discharge status, and long-term mortality. Fried frailty criteria were met in 44 (59%) patients, but there was no association with the primary outcome (p = 0.10). However, an abridged set of 3 criteria (exhaustion, inactivity, and grip strength) was predictive of the primary outcome (odds ratio 2.9, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 7.4), and of time to extubation and time to discharge. In patients with advanced heart failure, the 5-component Fried criteria may not be optimally sensitive to clinical differences. In conclusion, an abridged set of 3 frailty criteria was predictive of the primary outcome and several secondary outcomes, and may therefore be a clinically useful tool in this population.