Multispecialty multidisciplinary input into comorbidities along with treatment optimisation in heart failure reduces hospitalisation and clinic attendance.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) is associated with comorbidities which independently influence treatment response and outcomes. This retrospective observational study (January 2020-June 2021) analysed the impact of monthly HF multispecialty multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings to address management of HF comorbidities and thereby on provision, cost of care and HF outcomes. METHODS: Patients acted as their own controls, with outcomes compared for equal periods (for each patient) pre (HF MDT) versus post-MDT (multispecialty) meeting. The multispecialty MDT comprised HF cardiologists (primary, secondary, tertiary care), HF nurses, nephrologist, endocrinologist, palliative care, chest physician, pharmacist, clinical pharmacologist and geriatrician. Outcome measures were (1) all-cause hospitalisations, (2) outpatient clinic attendances and (3) cost. RESULTS: 334 patients (mean age 72.5±11 years) were discussed virtually through MDT meetings and follow-up duration was 13.9±4 months. Mean age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index was 7.6±2.1 and Rockwood Frailty Score 5.5±1.6. Multispecialty interventions included optimising diabetes therapy (haemoglobin A1c-HbA1c pre-MDT 68±11 mmol/mol vs post-MDT 61±9 mmol/mol; p<0.001), deprescribing to reduce anticholinergic burden (pre-MDT 1.85±0.4 vs 1.5±0.3 post-MDT; p<0.001), initiation of renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with advanced chronic kidney disease (9% pre vs 71% post-MDT; p<0.001). Other interventions included potassium binders, treatment of anaemia, falls assessment, management of chest conditions, day-case ascitic, pleural drains and palliative support. Total cost of funding monthly multispecialty meetings was £32 400 and resultant 64 clinic appointments cost £9600. The post-MDT study period was associated with reduction in 481 clinic appointments (cost saving £72150) and reduced all-cause hospitalisations (pre-MDT 1.1±0.4 vs 0.6±0.1 post-MDT; p<0.001), reduction of 1586 hospital bed-days and cost savings of £634 400. Total cost saving to the healthcare system was £664 550. CONCLUSION: HF multispecialty virtual MDT model provides integrated, holistic care across all healthcare tiers for management of HF and associated comorbidities. This approach is associated with reduced clinic attendances and all-cause hospitalisations, leading to significant cost savings.

Telehealth Attitudes, Training, and Preparedness Among First-Year Internal Medicine Residents in the COVID-19 Era.

Introduction: Telehealth, especially the use of real-time video and phone visits in ambulatory care, is increasingly important in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The current state of internal medicine (IM) interns' telehealth training at the start of residency is unknown. Objective: To characterize the attitudes, training, and preparedness of IM interns regarding the use of telehealth video and phone visits in ambulatory care. Materials and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of IM interns at four IM residency programs in the United States in 2020. Results: One hundred fifty-six surveys were analyzed (response rate 82%). Seventy-five percent of interns rated training in the use of real-time video and phone visits for ambulatory care as important or very important. The vast majority received no training (74%) or clinical experience (90% no prior video visits, 81% no prior phone visits) during medical school. More interns believed that primary care may be effectively delivered via video visits compared with phone visits (77% vs. 35%). Most interns (69%) missed clinical time during medical school due to the COVID-19 pandemic; 41% felt that the pandemic negatively affected their ambulatory care preparation. Overall, the majority of interns (58%) felt prepared for primary care; only 12% felt prepared to deliver primary care using either video or phone visits. Conclusions: Although IM interns had favorable attitudes toward video and phone visits, few had training or clinical experience; most felt unprepared. Residency programs may need to close training gaps for current interns in conducting telehealth video and phone visits.