Optimising Transitional Care Following a Heart Failure Hospitalisation in Australia.

Hospitalisations for heart failure (HF) are associated with high rates of readmission and death, the most vulnerable period being within the first few weeks post-hospital discharge. Effective transition of care from hospital to community settings for patients with HF can help reduce readmission and mortality over the vulnerable period, and improve long-term outcomes for patients, their family or carers, and the healthcare system. Planning and communication underpin a seamless transition of care, by ensuring that the changes to patients' management initiated in hospital continue to be implemented following discharge and in the long term. This evidence-based guide, developed by a multidisciplinary group of Australian experts in HF, discusses best practice for achieving appropriate and effective transition of patients hospitalised with HF to community care in the Australian setting. It provides guidance on key factors to address before and after hospital discharge, as well as practical tools that can be used to facilitate a smooth transition of care.

A systematic approach to chronic heart failure care: a consensus statement.

The National Heart Foundation of Australia assembled an expert panel to provide guidance on policy and system changes to improve the quality of care for people with chronic heart failure (CHF). The recommendations have the potential to reduce emergency presentations, hospitalisations and premature death among patients with CHF. Best-practice management of CHF involves evidence-based, multidisciplinary, patient-centred care, which leads to better health outcomes. A CHF care model is required to achieve this. Although CHF management programs exist, ensuring access for everyone remains a challenge. This is particularly so for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, those from non-metropolitan areas and lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Lack of data and inadequate identification of people with CHF prevents efficient patient monitoring, limiting information to improve or optimise care. This leads to ineffectiveness in measuring outcomes and evaluating the CHF care provided. Expanding current cardiac registries to include patients with CHF and developing mechanisms to promote data linkage across care transitions are essential. As the prevalence of CHF rises, the demand for multidisciplinary workforce support will increase. Workforce planning should provide access to services outside of large cities, one of the main challenges it is currently facing. To enhance community-based management of CHF, general practitioners should be empowered to lead care. Incentive arrangements should favour provision of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and rural areas, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Ongoing research is vital to improving systems of care for people with CHF. Future research activity needs to ensure the translation of valuable knowledge and high-quality evidence into practice.

Expert Comment: Is Medication Titration in Heart Failure too Complex?

Large-scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and beta-blockers decrease mortality and hospitalisation in patients with heart failure (HF) associated with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. This has led to high prescription rates; however, these drugs are generally prescribed at much lower doses than the doses achieved in the RCTs. A number of strategies have been evaluated to improve medication titration in HF, including forced medication up-titration protocols, point-of-care decision support and extended scope of clinical practice for nurses and pharmacists. Most successful strategies have been multifaceted and have adapted existing multidisciplinary models of care. Furthermore, given the central role of general practitioners in long-term monitoring and care coordination in HF patients, these strategies should engage with primary care to facilitate the transition between the acute and primary healthcare sectors.

Improving medication titration in heart failure by embedding a structured medication titration plan.

BACKGROUND: To improve up-titration of medications to target dose in heart failure patients by improving communication from hospital to primary care. METHODS: This quality improvement project was undertaken within three heart failure disease management (HFDM) services in Queensland, Australia. A structured medication plan was collaboratively designed and implemented in an iterative manner, using methods including awareness raising and education, audit and feedback, integration into existing work practice, and incentive payments. Evaluation was undertaken using sequential audits, and included process measures (use of the titration plan, assignment of responsibility) and outcome measures (proportion of patients achieving target dose) in HFDM service patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. RESULTS: Comparison of the three patient cohorts (pre-intervention cohort A n=96, intervention cohort B n=95, intervention cohort C n=89) showed increase use of the titration plan, a shift to greater primary care responsibility for titration, and an increase in the proportion of patients achieving target doses of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB) (A 37% vs B 48% vs C 55%, p=0.051) and beta-blockers (A 38% vs B 33% vs C 51%, p=0.045). Combining all three cohorts, patients not on target doses when discharged from hospital were more likely to achieve target doses of ACEI/ARB (p<0.0001) and beta blockers (p<0.0001) within six months if they received a medication titration plan. CONCLUSIONS: A medication titration plan was successfully implemented in three HFDM services and improved transitional communication and achievement of target doses of evidence-based therapies within six months of hospital discharge.

Implementing a community-based model of exercise training following cardiac, pulmonary, and heart failure rehabilitation.

PURPOSE: Encouraging patients to continue regular activity beyond the period of formal cardiac, heart failure, or pulmonary rehabilitation is a challenge faced by all program coordinators. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a community model run by fitness instructors as long-term maintenance for patients exiting a disease-specific rehabilitation program. METHODS: Heartmoves programs were established in close proximity to all major tertiary hospitals in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, and all eligible patients were offered supported referral to a program. Referred patients and rehabilitation staff were surveyed regarding perceived barriers to attendance. Referral rates and individual attendance rates for the first 12 weeks were recorded. RESULTS: Over 12 months, 241 patients were referred to a community Heartmoves class, of whom 141 (59%) attended at least once and 76 (32% of referrals, 54% of initial attendees) attended more than 6 of the first 12 weeks. Preattendance surveys identified concerns about quality and safety, as well as social and logistic barriers. The programs proved to be sustainable, as evidenced by the growth of programs from 18 at the end of the project to 31 over a 18-month period. CONCLUSIONS: A supported referral pathway to Heartmoves provides a feasible and acceptable model for maintenance exercise following cardiac, heart failure, and pulmonary rehabilitation. Strategies that recognize and address barriers perceived by participants and by rehabilitation program staff should be part of the supported referral process.

The paradox of readmission: effect of a quality improvement program in hospitalized patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Congestive heart failure (CHF) is an increasingly common condition associated with significant hospital resource utilization. Initiating better disease management at the time of initial hospital admission has the potential to reduce readmissions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a multifaceted quality improvement program on 12-month hospital utilization in patients admitted to hospital with CHF. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study comparing baseline and intervention cohorts. PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive patients with CHF discharged alive from 3 metropolitan hospitals during the baseline (October 1, 2000 to April 17, 2001) and intervention (February 15, 2002 to August 31, 2002) study periods. Active prospective case-finding identified 220 baseline and 235 intervention participants; full data was available on 197 baseline and 219 intervention participants. INTERVENTIONS: Education and performance feedback for hospital and primary care practitioners; clinical decision support tools; individualized, guideline-based treatment plans; patient education and self-management support; and improved hospital-community integration. MEASUREMENTS: Twelve-month all-cause hospital readmission, 12-month mortality, readmission-free survival, heart failure-specific readmission, and total hospital days over 12 months. RESULTS: Intervention patients had a higher rate of all-cause readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10-2.46) but a trend to reduction in mortality (OR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.44-1.07). There was no difference in frequency of hospitalizations per year, number of hospital days, or the composite outcome of death or readmission. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention improved care processes and may have reduced mortality, but at the cost of higher readmission rates. Better understanding of intervention components, intensity, and targeting may optimize the effectiveness of disease management programs.

Using clinical indicators in a quality improvement programme targeting cardiac care.

RATIONALE: The Brisbane Cardiac Consortium, a quality improvement collaboration of clinicians from three hospitals and five divisions of general practice, developed and reported clinical indicators as measures of the quality of care received by patients with acute coronary syndromes or congestive heart failure. DEVELOPMENT OF INDICATORS: An expert panel derived indicators that measured gaps between evidence and practice. Data collected from hospital records and general practice heart-check forms were used to calculate process and outcome indicators for each condition. Our indicators were reliable (kappa scores 0.7-1.0) and widely accepted by clinicians as having face validity. Independent review of indicator-failed, in-hospital cases revealed that, for 27 of 28 process indicators, clinically legitimate reasons for withholding specific interventions were found in <5% of cases. IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTS: Indicators were reported every 6 months in hospitals and every 10 months in general practice. To stimulate practice change, we fed back indicators in conjunction with an education programme, and provided, when requested, customized analyses to different user groups. Significant improvement was seen in 17 of 40 process indicators over the course of the project. LESSONS LEARNED AND FUTURE PLANS: Lessons learnt included the need to: (i) ensure brevity and clarity of feedback formats; (ii) liberalize patient eligibility criteria for interventions in order to maximize sample size; (iii) limit the number of data items; (iv) balance effort of indicator validation with need for timely feedback; (v) utilize more economical methods of data collection and entry such as scannable forms; and (vi) minimize the burden of data verification and changes to indicator definitions. Indicator measurement is being continued and expanded to other public hospitals in the state, while divisions of general practice are exploring lower-cost methods of ongoing clinical audit. CONCLUSION: Use of clinical indicators succeeded in supporting clinicians to monitor practice standards and to realize change in systems of care and clinician behaviour.

Optimising care of acute coronary syndromes in three Australian hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To improve quality of in-hospital care of patients with acute coronary syndromes using a multifaceted quality improvement program. DESIGN: Prospective, before and after study of the effects of quality improvement interventions between October 2000 and August 2002. Quality of care of patients admitted between 1 October 2000 and 16 April 2001 (baseline) was compared with that of those admitted between 15 February 2002 and 31 August 2002 (post-intervention). SETTING: Three teaching hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients (n = 1594) admitted to hospital with acute coronary syndrome [mean age 68 years (SD 14 years); 65% males]. INTERVENTIONS: Clinical guidelines, reminder tools, and educational interventions; 6-monthly performance feedback; pharmacist-mediated patient education program; and facilitation of multidisciplinary review of work practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in key quality indicators relating to timing of electrocardiogram (ECG) and thrombolysis in emergency departments, serum lipid measurement, prescription of adjunctive drugs, and secondary prevention. RESULTS: Comparing post-intervention with baseline patients, increases occurred in the proportions of eligible patients: (i) undergoing timely ECG (70% versus 61%; P = 0.04); (ii) prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (70% versus 60%; P = 0.002) and lipid-lowering agents (77% versus 68%; P = 0.005); (iii) receiving cardiac counselling in hospital (57% versus 48%; P = 0.009); and (iv) referred to cardiac rehabilitation (17% versus 8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted approaches can improve care processes for patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes. Care processes under direct clinician control changed more quickly than those reliant on complex system factors. Identifying and overcoming organizational impediments to quality improvement deserves greater attention.

Achieving better in-hospital and after-hospital care of patients with acute cardiac disease.

In patients hospitalised with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and congestive heart failure (CHF), evidence suggests opportunities for improving in-hospital and after-hospital care, patient self-care, and hospital-community integration. A multidisciplinary quality improvement program was designed and instigated in Brisbane in October 2000 involving 250 clinicians at three teaching hospitals, 1080 general practitioners (GPs) from five Divisions of General Practice, 1594 patients with ACS and 904 patients with CHF. Quality improvement interventions were implemented over 17 months after a 6-month baseline period and included: clinical decision support (clinical practice guidelines, reminders, checklists, clinical pathways); educational interventions (seminars, academic detailing); regular performance feedback; patient self-management strategies; and hospital-community integration (discharge referral summaries; community pharmacist liaison; patient prompts to attend GPs). Using a before-after study design to assess program impact, significantly more program patients compared with historical controls received: ACS: Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and lipid-lowering agents at discharge, aspirin and beta-blockers at 3 months after discharge, inpatient cardiac counselling, and referral to outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. CHF: Assessment for reversible precipitants, use of prophylaxis for deep-venous thrombosis, beta-blockers at discharge, ACE inhibitors at 6 months after discharge, imaging of left ventricular function, and optimal management of blood pressure levels. Risk-adjusted mortality rates at 6 and 12 months decreased, respectively, from 9.8% to 7.4% (P = 0.06) and from 13.4% to 10.1% (P = 0.06) for patients with ACS and from 22.8% to 15.2% (P < 0.001) and from 32.8% to 22.4% (P = 0.005) for patients with CHF. Quality improvement programs that feature multifaceted interventions across the continuum of care can change clinical culture, optimise care and improve clinical outcomes.