Curtin University Homepage
  • Library
  • Help
    • Admin

    espace - Curtin’s institutional repository

    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item

    Prolonged impact of home versus clinic-based management of chronic heart failure: Extended follow-up of a pragmatic, multicentre randomized trial cohort

    Access Status
    Fulltext not available
    Authors
    Stewart, S.
    Carrington, M.
    Horowitz, J.
    Marwick, T.
    Newton, P.
    Davidson, P.
    Macdonald, P.
    Thompson, D.
    Chan, Y.
    Krum, H.
    Reid, Christopher
    Scuffham, P.
    Date
    2014
    Type
    Journal Article
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Stewart, S. and Carrington, M. and Horowitz, J. and Marwick, T. and Newton, P. and Davidson, P. and Macdonald, P. et al. 2014. Prolonged impact of home versus clinic-based management of chronic heart failure: Extended follow-up of a pragmatic, multicentre randomized trial cohort. International Journal of Cardiology. 174 (3): pp. 600-610.
    Source Title
    International Journal of Cardiology
    DOI
    10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.04.164
    ISSN
    0167-5273
    School
    Department of Health Policy and Management
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/35141
    Collection
    • Curtin Research Publications
    Abstract

    Objectives We compared the longer-term impact of the two most commonly applied forms of post-discharge management designed to minimize recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in typically older patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods We followed a multi-center randomized controlled trial cohort of Australian patients hospitalized with CHF and initially allocated to home-based or specialized CHF clinic-based intervention for 1368 ± 216 days. Blinded endpoints included event-free survival from all-cause emergency hospitalization or death, all-cause mortality and rate of all-cause hospitalization and stay. Results 280 patients (73% male, aged 71 ± 14 years and 73% left ventricular systolic dysfunction) were initially randomized to home-based (n = 143) or clinic-based (n = 137) intervention. During extended follow-up (complete for 274 patients), 1139 all-cause hospitalizations (7477 days of hospital stay) and 121 (43.2%) deaths occurred. There was no difference in the primary endpoint; 20 (14.0%) home-based versus 13 (7.4%) clinic-based patients remained event-free (adjusted HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.15; p = 0.378). Significantly fewer home-based (51/143, 35.7%) than clinic-based intervention (71/137, 51.8%) patients died (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90: p = 0.012). Home-based versus clinic-based intervention patients accumulated 592 and 547 all-cause hospitalizations (p = 0.087) associated with 3067 (median 4.0, IQR 2.0 to 6.8) versus 4410 (6.0, IQR 3.0 to 12.0) days of hospital stay (p < 0.01 for rate and duration of hospital stay). Conclusions Relative to clinic-based intervention, home-based intervention was not associated with prolonged event-free survival. Home-based intervention was, however, associated with significantly fewer all-cause deaths and significantly fewer days of hospital stay in the longer-term.

    Related items

    Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.

    • Impact of home versus clinic-based management of chronic heart failure: The WHICH? (Which heart failure intervention is most cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing hospital care) multicenter, randomized trial
      Stewart, S.; Carrington, M.; Marwick, T.; Davidson, P.; MacDonald, P.; Horowitz, J.; Krum, H.; Newton, P.; Reid, Christopher; Chan, Y.; Scuffham, P. (2012)
      Objectives: The goal of this study was to make a head-to-head comparison of 2 common forms of multidisciplinary chronic heart failure (CHF) management. Background: Although direct patient contact appears to be best in ...
    • The WHICH? Trial: Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients
      Stewart, S.; Carrington, M.; Marwick, T.; Davidson, P.; MacDonald, P.; Horowitz, J.; Krum, H.; Newton, P.; Reid, Christopher; Scuffham, P. (2011)
      Aims: To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial. Methods: WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized ...
    • Patient Preferences and Willingness-To-Pay for a Home or Clinic Based Program of Chronic Heart Failure Management: Findings from the Which? Trial
      Whitty, J.; Stewart, S.; Carrington, M.; Calderone, A.; Marwick, T.; Horowitz, J.; Krum, H.; Davidson, P.; Macdonald, P.; Reid, Christopher; Scuffham, P. (2013)
      Background: Beyond examining their overall cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of effect, it is important to understand patient preferences for the delivery of different modes of chronic heart failure management programs ...
    Advanced search

    Browse

    Communities & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument TypeThis CollectionIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument Type

    My Account

    Admin

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Follow Curtin

    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 

    CRICOS Provider Code: 00301JABN: 99 143 842 569TEQSA: PRV12158

    Copyright | Disclaimer | Privacy statement | Accessibility

    Curtin would like to pay respect to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of our community by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which the Perth campus is located, the Whadjuk people of the Nyungar Nation; and on our Kalgoorlie campus, the Wongutha people of the North-Eastern Goldfields.