Development of a risk score for patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Ischaemic cardiomyopathy is a leading cause of heart failure and is associated with a poor prognosis. AIM: To evaluate predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and to develop a risk score for the disease. METHODS: All patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy referred to a tertiary hospital between 2010 and 2018 for stress-rest gated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were included retrospectively (n=747). Clinical and gated SPECT-derived variables were analysed as predictors of MACE, a combined endpoint of cardiovascular mortality, heart failure hospitalization or myocardial infarction during follow-up. A multivariable Cox model using backwards stepwise regression with competing risks was used to select the best parsimonious model. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, 313 patients had MACE (41.9%). Independent predictors of MACE were previous heart failure admission, worsening angina or dyspnoea, estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60mL/min/1.73 m2, age>73 years, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, end-diastolic volume index>83mL/m2 and>12% of scarred myocardium. A risk score ranging from 0 to 12 classified patients as at intermediate risk (event rate of 4.0 MACE per 100 person-years), high risk (11.3 MACE per 100 person-years) or very high risk (27.8 MACE per 100 person-years). The internally validated area under the curve was 0.720 (95% confidence interval 0.660-0.740) and calibration was adequate (Hosmer-Lemeshow test P=0.28) for MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, a simple risk score using dichotomic and readily available variables obtained from clinical assessment and gated SPECT accurately predicts the risk of MACE.

Strengths and limitations of patient registries in infective endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a serious albeit relatively infrequent disease. Given the paucity of cases, particularly in non-referral centres, patient registries have progressively gained relevance to inform about the epidemiology, clinical presentation, and natural history of IE in the last two decades. Although they have become key to advancing knowledge of IE, registries also have shortcomings that lead to relevant consequences that are often overlooked. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to discuss the strengths and limitations of registries in IE. SOURCES: We conducted a PubMed search of relevant articles published between January 2000 and June 2022. CONTENT: The backbone of the contemporary knowledge on IE has been built upon data collected in prospective registries, which has allowed us to collect data on relatively unknown aspects of the disease, identify knowledge gaps, and generate new hypotheses, serving as platforms for further research endeavours. Well-exploited registries can provide key information on how IE is distributed across populations and how it differentially impacts patients and subgroups. However, registries face several difficulties, such as the definition of IE, which includes subjective variables and changes over time. Other limitations include difficulty achieving a comprehensive collection of cases (which depends on both project funding and information systems), over-representation of the centres that created the registry, lack of inclusion of variables to assess endpoints that are relevant to patients in terms of quality of life and prognosis, and ethical issues. IMPLICATIONS: The review of the advantages and disadvantages of registries aims to improve the quality of the information collected, the viability of the registry itself, and the ability to answer questions that are relevant to both researchers and patients.

Comprehensive Geriatric Hospital at Home: Adaptation to Referral and Case-Mix Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the evolution of a Hospital at Home (HAH) based on comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), including its adaptability to changing case-mixes and pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Observational study of consecutive admissions to a combined step-up (admissions from home) and step-down (hospital discharge) HAH during 3 periods: prepandemic (2018‒February 2020) vs pandemic (March‒December 2020, and January‒December 2021). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were all consecutive patients admitted to a CGA-based HAH, located in Barcelona, Spain. Referrals followed acute events or exacerbation of chronic conditions, by either primary care (step-up) or after post-acute discharge (step-down). METHODS: HAH intervention based on CGA and incorporated geriatric rehabilitation. Patient case-mix, functional evolution (Barthel index), and mortality were compared across periods and between pathways. RESULTS: HAH capacity expanded 3 fold from 15 to 45 virtual beds and altogether managed 688 consecutive patients [mean age (SD) = 82.5 (9.6) years; 59% women]. Pandemic case-mix was slightly older (mean age = 83.5 vs 82 years, P = .012) than prepandemic, with greater mobility impairment. Across periods, step-up increased (26.1%, 40.9%, 48.2%, P < .01) because of medical events, skin ulcers, and post-acute stroke, whereas step-down decreased; multivariable models showed no differences in functional improvement or mortality. When comparing pathways, step-up featured older patients with higher comorbidity, worse functional status, and lower absolute functional gain than step-down (5.6 vs 13 points of Barthel index, P < .01), remaining statistically significant after adjusting for covariates (P = .003); no differences in mortality were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A multipurpose, step-down and step-up CGA HAH expanded its activity and adapted to changing case-mixes and pathways throughout COVID-19 pandemic waves. Although further quantitative and qualitative studies are needed to assess the impact of this model, our results suggest that harnessing the adaptability of HAH may help advance a paradigm shift toward more person-centered, cost-effective models of clinical care aimed at older adults.

Patient-centered care in Coronary Heart Disease: what do you want to measure? A systematic review of reviews on patient-reported outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: The number of published articles on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) in Coronary Heart Disease (CHD), a leading cause of disability-adjusted life years lost worldwide, has been growing in the last decades. The aim of this study was to identify all the disease-specific PROMs developed for or used in CHD and summarize their characteristics (regardless of the construct), to facilitate the selection of the most adequate one for each purpose. METHODS: A systematic review of reviews was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. PROQOLID and BiblioPRO libraries were also checked. PROMs were classified by construct and information was extracted from different sources regarding their main characteristics such as aim, number of items, specific dimensions, original language, and metric properties that have been assessed. RESULTS: After title and abstract screening of 1224 articles, 114 publications were included for full text review. Finally, we identified 56 PROMs: 12 symptoms scales, 3 measuring functional status, 21 measuring Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL), and 20 focused on other constructs. Three of the symptoms scales were specifically designed for a study (no metric properties evaluated), and only five have been included in a published study in the last decade. Regarding functional status, reliability and validity have been assessed for Duke Activity Index and Seattle Angina Questionnaire, which present multiple language versions. For HRQL, most of the PROMs included physical, emotional, and social domains. Responsiveness has only been evaluated for 10 out the 21 HRQL PROMs identified. Other constructs included psychological aspects, self-efficacy, attitudes, perceptions, threats and expectations about the treatment, knowledge, adjustment, or limitation for work, social support, or self-care. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variety of instruments to assess the patients' perspective in CHD, covering several constructs. This is the first systematic review of specific PROMs for CHD including all constructs. It has practical significance, as it summarizes relevant information that may help clinicians, researchers, and other healthcare stakeholders to choose the most adequate instrument for promoting shared decision making in a trend towards value-based healthcare.

Sample size requirement in trials that use the composite endpoint major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE): new insights.

BACKGROUND: The real impact of the degree of association (DoA) between endpoint components of a composite endpoint (CE) on sample size requirement (SSR) has not been explored. We estimate the impact of the DoA between death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) on SSR of trials using use the CE of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). METHODS: A systematic review and quantitative synthesis of trials that include MACE as the primary outcome through search strategies in MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases. We limited to articles published in journals indexed in the first quartile of the Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems category (Journal Citation Reports, 2015-2020). The authors were contacted to estimate the DoA between death and AMI using joint probability and correlation. We analyzed the SSR variation using the DoA estimated from RCTs. RESULTS: Sixty-three of 134 publications that reported event rates and the therapy effect in all component endpoints were included in the quantitative synthesis. The most frequent combination was death, AMI, and revascularization (n = 20; 31.8%). The correlation between death and AMI, estimated from 5 trials¸ oscillated between - 0.02 and 0.31. SSR varied from 14,602 in the scenario with the strongest correlation to 12,259 in the scenario with the weakest correlation; the relative impact was 16%. CONCLUSIONS: The DoA between death and AMI is highly variable and may lead to a considerable SSR variation in a trial including MACE.

Impact of revascularization guided by functional testing in ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: The burden of ischaemia is a risk factor for adverse outcomes in ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) but is not systematically tested when deciding on revascularization. Limited data exists in patients with ICM regarding the interaction between ischaemia and early coronary revascularization (ECR). This study sought to determine if the burden of ischaemia modifies the outcomes of ECR in ICM. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with ICM (left ventricular ejection fraction < 40%) with a stress-rest gated single-photon emission computed tomography (N = 747) were followed-up for ECR and major cardiovascular events (MACEs, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or heart failure hospitalization). A 1:1 matched population was selected using a propensity score for ECR. The interaction between ischaemia and ECR was evaluated in the matched cohort. In the initial cohort, 131 patients underwent ECR. Of them, 109 were matched to non-ECR patients. After a median follow up of 4.1 years, 102 (46.8%) patients experienced a MACE. The effect of revascularization on MACE was dependent of the percent of ischaemia (P for the interaction at 10% ischaemia = 0.021), so that a trend towards a decreased risk of MACE was seen in patients with >10% of ischaemia [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.59 (0.30-1.18)], whereas a non-significant increase of MACE was observed in those with <10% ischaemia (HR = 1.67 [0.94-2.96]). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary cohort of patients with ICM, the beneficial effects of ECR may be mediated by the percent of ischaemia. This study supports stress testing in ICM and an ischaemia-guided approach for ECR.

Corrigendum: Dynamics of Emergency Cardiovascular Hospital Admissions and In-Hospital Mortality During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Time Series Analysis and Impact of Socioeconomic Factors.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.827212.].

Dynamics of Emergency Cardiovascular Hospital Admissions and In-Hospital Mortality During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Time Series Analysis and Impact of Socioeconomic Factors.

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the decline in urgent cardiovascular hospital admissions and in-hospital mortality during the COVID pandemic in two successive waves, and to evaluate differences by sex, age, and deprivation index subgroups. Methods and Results: We obtained acute cardiovascular hospital episodes during the years 2019-2020 from region-wide data on public healthcare usage for the population of Catalonia (North-East Spain). We fitted time models to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and acute heart failure (HF) admissions during the first pandemic wave, the between-waves period, and the second wave compared with the corresponding pre-COVID-19 periods and to test for the interaction with sex, age, and area-based socioeconomic level. We evaluated the effect of COVID-19 period on in-hospital mortality. ACS (n = 8,636) and HF (n = 27,566) episodes were defined using primary diagnostic ICD-10 codes. ACS and HF admissions decreased during the first wave (IRR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.58-0.76 and IRR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55-0.68, respectively) and during the second wave (IRR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.72-0.88 and IRR = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.69-0.84, respectively); acute HF admissions also decreased in the period between waves (IRR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.74-0.89). The impact was similar in all sex and socioeconomic subgroups and was higher in older patients with ACS. In-hospital mortality was higher than expected only during the first wave. Conclusion: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a marked decline in urgent cardiovascular hospital admissions that were attenuated during the second wave. Both the decline and the attenuation of the effect have been similar in all subgroups regardless of age, sex, or socioeconomic status. In-hospital mortality for ACS and HF episodes increased during the first wave, but not during the second wave.

Association of renin-angiotensin system blockers with COVID-19 diagnosis and prognosis in patients with hypertension: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The effect of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade either by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility, mortality and severity is inadequately described. We examined the association between RAS blockade and COVID-19 diagnosis and prognosis in a large population-based cohort of patients with hypertension (HTN). METHODS: This is a cohort study using regional health records. We identified all individuals aged 18-95 years from 87 healthcare reference areas of the main health provider in Catalonia (Spain), with a history of HTN from primary care records. Data were linked to COVID-19 test results, hospital, pharmacy and mortality records from 1 March 2020 to 14 August 2020. We defined exposure to RAS blockers as the dispensation of ACEi/ARBs during the 3 months before COVID-19 diagnosis or 1 March 2020. Primary outcomes were: COVID-19 infection and severe progression in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (the composite of need for invasive respiratory support or death). For both outcomes and for each exposure of interest (RAS blockade, ACEi or ARB) we estimated associations in age-, sex-, healthcare area- and propensity score-matched samples. RESULTS: From a cohort of 1 365 215 inhabitants we identified 305 972 patients with HTN history. Recent use of ACEi/ARBs in patients with HTN was associated with a lower 6-month cumulative incidence of COVID-19 diagnosis {3.78% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.69-3.86%] versus 4.53% (95% CI 4.40-4.65%); P < 0.001}. In the 12 344 patients with COVID-19 infection, the use of ACEi/ARBs was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalization with need for invasive respiratory support or death [OR = 0.91 (0.71-1.15); P = 0.426]. CONCLUSIONS: RAS blockade in patients with HTN is not associated with higher risk of COVID-19 infection or with a worse progression of the disease.

Coste-efectividad del desfibrilador automático implantable para la prevención primaria de la muerte súbita cardiaca / Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death

Introducción y objetivos: El desfibrilador automático implantable (DAI) es una alternativa coste-efectiva para la prevención secundaria de la muerte súbita cardiaca, pero sigue habiendo dudas sobre su eficiencia en prevención primaria, sobre todo en pacientes con cardiopatía no isquémica.Métodos: Análisis de coste-utilidad del DAI más tratamiento médico convencional frente a tratamiento médico convencional para la prevención primaria de arritmias cardiacas desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Se simuló el curso de la enfermedad mediante modelos de Markov en pacientes con y sin cardiopatía isquémica. Los parámetros del modelo se basaron en los resultados obtenidos mediante metanálisis de los ensayos clínicos publicados entre 1996 y 2018 en los que se comparaba el DAI con el tratamiento médico convencional, los resultados de seguridad del ensayo DANISH y el análisis de la práctica clínica habitual en un hospital terciario.Resultados: Se estimó un beneficio del DAI sobre la muerte por cualquier causa con HR = 0,70 (IC95%, 0,58-0,85) en cardiopatía isquémica y HR = 0,79 (IC95%, 0,66-0,96) en no isquémica. La razón de coste-efectividad incremental estimada mediante análisis probabilístico fue de 19.171 euros/año de vida ajustado por calidad (AVAC) en pacientes con cardiopatía isquémica, 31.084 euros/AVAC en pacientes con miocardiopatía dilatada no isquémica y 23.230 euros/AVAC en los menores de 68 años.Conclusiones: La eficiencia del DAI monocameral ha mejorado en la última década y este resulta coste-efectivo para los pacientes con disfunción ventricular izquierda de origen isquémico o no isquémico menores de 68 años considerando una disposición a pagar 25.000 euros/AVAC. En pacientes no isquémicos mayores, la razón de coste-efectividad incremental estimada se sitúa alrededor de los 30.000 euros/AVAC (AU)

Introduction and objective: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) are a cost-effective alternative for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, but their efficiency in primary prevention, especially among patients with nonischemic heart disease, is still uncertain.Methods: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of ICD plus conventional medical treatment (CMT) vs CMT for primary prevention of cardiac arrhythmias from the perspective of the national health service. We simulated the course of the disease by using Markov models in patients with ischemic and nonischemic heart disease. The parameters of the model were based on the results obtained from a meta-analysis of clinical trials published between 1996 and 2018 comparing ICD plus CMT vs CMT, the safety results of the DANISH trial, and analysis of real-world clinical practice in a tertiary hospital.Results: We estimated that ICD reduced the likelihood of all-cause death in patients with ischemic heart disease (HR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.58-0.85) and in those with nonischemic heart disease (HR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.66–0.96). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimated with probabilistic analysis was €19 171/quality adjusted life year (QALY) in patients with ischemic heart disease and €31 084/QALY in those with nonischemic dilated myocardiopathy overall and €23 230/QALY in patients younger than 68 years.Conclusions: The efficiency of single-lead ICD systems has improved in the last decade, and these devices are cost-effective in patients with ischemic and nonischemic left ventricular dysfunction younger than 68 years, assuming willingness to pay as €25 000/QALY. For older nonischemic patients, the ICER was around €30 000/QALY (AU)

Revascularized ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Temporal trends in contemporary therapies and impact on outcomes.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To assess, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who underwent primary percutaneous intervention, the pace of introduction in clinical practice (2010-2017) of drug-eluting stents (DES), ticagrelor, prasugrel, and prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration, and their potential impact on the risk of 2-year outcomes. METHODS: Prospective and exhaustive community-wide cohort of 14 841 STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous intervention between 2010 and 2017. Index episodes were obtained from the Catalan Codi IAM Registry, events during follow-up from the Minimum Data Set and DAPT were defined by pharmacy dispensation. Follow-up was 24 months. The temporal trend for exposures and outcomes was assessed using regression models. RESULTS: Age> 65 years, diabetes, renal failure, previous heart failure, and need for anticoagulation at discharge were more frequent in later periods (P <.001). From 2010 to 2017, the use of DES increased from 31.1% to 69.8%, ticagrelor from 0.1% to 28.6%, prasugrel from 1.5% to 23.8%, and the median consecutive months on DAPT from 2 to 10 (P <.001 for all). Adjusted analysis showed a temporal trend to a lower risk of the main outcome over time: the composite of death, acute myocardial infarction, stroke and repeat revascularization (absolute odds reduction 0.005% each quarter; OR, 0.995; 95%CI, 0.99-0.999; P=.028). The odds of all individual components except stroke were reduced, although significance was only reached for revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a strong increase between 2010 and 2017 in the use and duration of DAPT and the use of ticagrelor, prasugrel and DES, there was no substantial reduction in major cardiovascular outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) are a cost-effective alternative for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, but their efficiency in primary prevention, especially among patients with nonischemic heart disease, is still uncertain. METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of ICD plus conventional medical treatment (CMT) vs CMT for primary prevention of cardiac arrhythmias from the perspective of the national health service. We simulated the course of the disease by using Markov models in patients with ischemic and nonischemic heart disease. The parameters of the model were based on the results obtained from a meta-analysis of clinical trials published between 1996 and 2018 comparing ICD plus CMT vs CMT, the safety results of the DANISH trial, and analysis of real-world clinical practice in a tertiary hospital. RESULTS: We estimated that ICD reduced the likelihood of all-cause death in patients with ischemic heart disease (HR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.58-0.85) and in those with nonischemic heart disease (HR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.66-0.96). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimated with probabilistic analysis was €19 171/quality adjusted life year (QALY) in patients with ischemic heart disease and €31 084/QALY in those with nonischemic dilated myocardiopathy overall and €23 230/QALY in patients younger than 68 years. CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of single-lead ICD systems has improved in the last decade, and these devices are cost-effective in patients with ischemic and nonischemic left ventricular dysfunction younger than 68 years, assuming willingness to pay as €25 000/QALY. For older nonischemic patients, the ICER was around €30 000/QALY.

Prognostic models for mortality after cardiac surgery in patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review and aggregation of prediction models.

BACKGROUND: There are several prognostic models to estimate the risk of mortality after surgery for active infective endocarditis (IE). However, these models incorporate different predictors and their performance is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We systematically reviewed and critically appraised all available prediction models of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing surgery for IE, and aggregated them into a meta-model. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to June 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies that developed or updated a prognostic model of postoperative mortality in patient with IE. METHODS: We assessed the risk of bias of the models using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool) and we aggregated them into an aggregate meta-model based on stacked regressions and optimized it for a nationwide registry of IE patients. The meta-model performance was assessed using bootstrap validation methods and adjusted for optimism. RESULTS: We identified 11 prognostic models for postoperative mortality. Eight models had a high risk of bias. The meta-model included weighted predictors from the remaining three models (EndoSCORE, specific ES-I and specific ES-II), which were not rated as high risk of bias and provided full model equations. Additionally, two variables (age and infectious agent) that had been modelled differently across studies, were estimated based on the nationwide registry. The performance of the meta-model was better than the original three models, with the corresponding performance measures: C-statistics 0.79 (95% CI 0.76-0.82), calibration slope 0.98 (95% CI 0.86-1.13) and calibration-in-the-large -0.05 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: The meta-model outperformed published models and showed a robust predictive capacity for predicting the individualized risk of postoperative mortality in patients with IE. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020192602).

Adaptation and psychometric validation of Diabetes Health Profile (DHP-18) in patients with type 2 diabetes in Quito, Ecuador: a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The Diabetes Health Profile (DHP-18), structured in three dimensions (psychological distress (PD), barriers to activity (BA) and disinhibited eating (DE)), assesses the psychological and behavioural burden of living with type 2 diabetes. The objectives were to adapt the DHP-18 linguistically and culturally for use with patients with type 2 DM in Ecuador, and to evaluate its psychometric properties. METHODS: Participants were recruited using purposive sampling through patient clubs at primary health centres in Quito, Ecuador. The DHP-18 validation consisted in the linguistic validation made by two Ecuadorian doctors and eight patient interviews. And in the psychometric validation, where participants provided clinical and sociodemographic data and responded to the SF-12v2 health survey and the linguistically and culturally adapted version of the DHP-18. The original measurement model was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was assessed through internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reproducibility by administering DHP-18 in a random subgroup of the participants two weeks after (n = 75) using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Convergent validity was assessed by establishing previous hypotheses of the expected correlations with the SF12v2 using Spearman's coefficient. RESULTS: Firstly, the DHP-18 was linguistically and culturally adapted. Secondly, in the psychometric validation, we included 146 participants, 58.2% female, the mean age was 56.8 and 31% had diabetes complications. The CFA indicated a good fit to the original three factor model (χ2 (132) = 162.738, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.990; TLI = 0.989; SRMR = 0.086 and RMSEA = 0.040. The BA dimension showed the lowest standardized factorial loads (λ) (ranging from 0.21 to 0.77), while λ ranged from 0.57 to 0.89 and from 0.46 to 0.73, for the PD and DE dimensions respectively. Cronbach's alphas were 0.81, 0.63 and 0.74 and ICCs 0.70, 0.57 and 0.62 for PD, BA and DE, respectively. Regarding convergent validity, we observed weaker correlations than expected between DHP-18 dimensions and SF-12v2 dimensions (r > -0.40 in two of three hypotheses). CONCLUSIONS: The original three factor model showed good fit to the data. Although reliability parameters were adequate for PD and DE dimensions, the BA presented lower internal consistency and future analysis should verify the applicability and cultural equivalence of some of the items of this dimension to Ecuador.

Clinical Risk Prediction in Patients With Left Ventricular Myocardial Noncompaction.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) is a heterogeneous entity with uncertain prognosis. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to develop and validate a prediction model of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and to identify LVNC cases without events during long-term follow-up. METHODS: This is a retrospective longitudinal multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients fulfilling LVNC criteria by echocardiography or cardiovascular magnetic resonance. MACE were defined as heart failure (HF), ventricular arrhythmias (VAs), systemic embolisms, or all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 585 patients were included (45 ± 20 years of age, 57% male). LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 48% ± 17%, and 18% presented late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). After a median follow-up of 5.1 years, MACE occurred in 223 (38%) patients: HF in 110 (19%), VAs in 87 (15%), systemic embolisms in 18 (3%), and 34 (6%) died. LVEF was the main variable independently associated with MACE (P < 0.05). LGE was associated with HF and VAs in patients with LVEF >35% (P < 0.05). A prediction model of MACE was developed using Cox regression, composed by age, sex, electrocardiography, cardiovascular risk factors, LVEF, and family aggregation. C-index was 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.75) in the derivation cohort and 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.71-0.73) in an external validation cohort. Patients with no electrocardiogram abnormalities, LVEF ≥50%, no LGE, and negative family screening presented no MACE at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: LVNC is associated with an increased risk of heart failure and ventricular arrhythmias. LVEF is the variable most strongly associated with MACE; however, LGE confers additional risk in patients without severe systolic dysfunction. A risk prediction model is developed and validated to guide management.

El riesgo competitivo puede explicar en gran medida la disminución de los ingresos por enfermedad cardiovascular aguda durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Respuesta / Competing risk largely explains the drop in admissions for acute cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. Response

No dsponible

Healthcare professionals' opinions, barriers and facilitators towards low-value clinical practices in the hospital setting / Opiniones, barreras y facilitadores de los profesionales de la salud hacia las prácticas clínicas de poco valor en el ámbito hospitalario

OBJECTIVE: To explore healthcare professionals' opinions about low-value practices, identify practices of this kind possibly present in the hospital and barriers and facilitators to reduce them. Low-value practices include those with little or no clinical benefit that may harm patients or lead to a waste of resources. METHOD: Using a mixed methodology, we carried out a survey and two focus groups in a tertiary hospital. In the survey, we assessed doctors' agreement, subjective adherence and perception of usefulness of 134 recommendations to reduce low-value practices from local and international initiatives. We also identified low-value practices possibly present in the hospital. In the focus groups with professionals from surgical and medical fields, using a phenomenological approach, we identified additional low-value practices, barriers and facilitators to reduce them. RESULTS: 169 doctors of 25 specialties participated (response rate: 7%-100%). Overall agreement with recommendations, subjective adherence and usefulness were 83%, 90% and 70%, respectively. Low-value practices form 22 recommendations (16%) were considered as possibly present in the hospital. In the focus groups, the professionals identified seven more. Defensive medicine and scepticism due to contradictory evidence were the main barriers. Facilitators included good leadership and coordination between professionals. CONCLUSIONS: High agreement with recommendations to reduce low-value practices and high perception of usefulness reflect great awareness of low-value care in the hospital. However, there are several barriers to reduce them. Interventions to reduce low-value practices should foster confidence in decision-making processes between professionals and patients and provide trusted evidence

OBJETIVO: Explorar las opiniones de profesionales sanitarios sobre las prácticas de poco valor, identificar aquellas posiblemente presentes en el hospital y las barreras y los facilitadores para reducirlas. Las prácticas de poco valor incluyen aquellas con poco beneficio clínico que pueden perjudicar a los pacientes o desperdiciar recursos. MÉTODO: Usando una metodología mixta se llevaron a cabo una encuesta y varios grupos focales en un hospital terciario. En la encuesta se evaluó el grado de acuerdo, la adherencia subjetiva y la percepción de utilidad de 134 recomendaciones para reducir las prácticas de poco valor de iniciativas locales e internacionales, y se identificaron aquellas que podrían estar realizándose en el hospital. En dos grupos focales con profesionales de campos médicos y quirúrgicos, utilizando un enfoque fenomenológico, se identificaron prácticas de poco valor adicionales, barreras y facilitadores para reducirlas. RESULTADOS: En la encuesta participaron 169 médicos de 25 especialidades (tasa de respuesta: 7-100%). El acuerdo con las recomendaciones, la adherencia subjetiva y la utilidad fueron del 83%, el 90% y el 70%, respectivamente. Se identificaron prácticas de poco valor de 22 recomendaciones (16%) posiblemente presentes en el hospital. En los grupos focales se identificaron siete prácticas de poco valor adicionales; la medicina defensiva y el escepticismo debido a evidencia contradictoria como principales barreras; y un buen liderazgo y la coordinación entre profesionales como facilitadores. CONCLUSIONES: El alto grado de acuerdo con las recomendaciones para reducir las prácticas de poco valor y la alta percepción de utilidad reflejan una gran concienciación sobre este problema en el hospital. Sin embargo, existen numerosas barreras para eliminarlas. Las intervenciones para reducirlas deberían fomentar la confianza en la toma de decisiones entre profesionales y pacientes, y proporcionar una evidencia confiable