Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary heart failure disease management programme on 1-year mortality Prospective cohort study

Medicine (United States)

Volumn 95, Issue 37, 2016, Pages

  Laborde Castérot, Hervé ^a   Agrinier, Nelly ^a,b   Zannad, Faiez ^b,c   Mebazaa, Alexandre ^d,e,f   Rossignol, Patrick ^b,c   Girerd, Nicolas ^b,c   Alla, François ^a   Thilly, Nathalie ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LORRAINE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NANCY   (France)

^c CRIN INI CRCT Network   (France)

^d INSERM   (France)

^e UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^f ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE HÔPITAUX DE PARIS   (France)

Author keywords

Disease management programme; Heart failure; Instrumental variable; Observational study; Propensity score

Indexed keywords

AMINO TERMINAL PRO BRAIN NATRIURETIC PEPTIDE; BRAIN NATRIURETIC PEPTIDE; CREATININE; POTASSIUM; SODIUM;

ACUTE HEART FAILURE; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; CARDIOVASCULAR PARAMETERS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COHORT ANALYSIS; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE EJECTION FRACTION; HEMOGLOBIN BLOOD LEVEL; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT MONITORING; POTASSIUM BLOOD LEVEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SODIUM BLOOD LEVEL; SURVIVAL RATE; VERY ELDERLY; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FRANCE; HEART FAILURE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; FRANCE; HEART FAILURE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84991577440     PISSN: 00257974     EISSN: 15365964     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004399     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Santulli G. Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in the 21st century: updated numbers and updated facts. J Cardiovasc Dis 2013;1:1-2.
2. McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2012;33:1787-847.
3. Laribi S, Aouba A, Nikolaou M, et al. Trends in death attributed to heart failure over the past two decades in Europe. Eur J Heart Fail 2012;14:234-9.
4. Gabet A, Juilliere Y, Lamarche-Vadel A, et al. National trends in rate of patients hospitalized for heart failure and heart failure mortality in France, 2000-2012. Eur J Heart Fail 2015;17:583-90.
5. Takeda A, Taylor SJ, Taylor RS, et al. Clinical service organisation for heart failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;9:CD002752.
6. Victora CG, Habicht JP, Bryce J. Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. Am J Public Health 2004;94:400-5.
7. Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 1996;312:1215-8.
8. Suissa S. Immortal time bias in pharmaco-epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 2008;167:492-9.
9. Agrinier N, Altieri C, Alla F, et al. Effectiveness of a multidimensional home nurse led heart failure disease management program- A French nationwide time-series comparison. Int J Cardiol 2013;168:3652-8.
10. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, et al. National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:137-47.
11. Maisel A, Mueller C, Adams K Jr, et al. State of the art: using natriuretic peptide levels in clinical practice. Eur J Heart Fail 2008;10:824-39.
12. ADELF, ADEREST, AEEMA, EPITER. Recommendations for professional standards and good epidemiological practices (version France 2007). Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2008;56(Spec No 1):S121-75.
13. Austin PC, Grootendorst P, Anderson GM. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study. Stat Med 2007;26:734-53.
14. Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res 2011;46:399-424.
15. Stürmer T, Wyss R, Glynn RJ, et al. Propensity scores for confounder adjustment when assessing the effects of medical interventions using nonexperimental study designs. J Intern Med 2014;275:570-80.
16. Ali MS, Groenwold RH, Belitser SV, et al. Reporting of covariate selection and balance assessment in propensity score analysis is suboptimal: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:112-21.
17. Marshall A, Altman DG, Holder RL. Comparison of imputation methods for handling missing covariate data when fitting a Cox proportional hazards model: a resampling study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:112.
18. Rubin DB. Multiple implutation after 18+ years. J Am Stat Assoc 1996;91:17.
19. Brookhart MA, Rassen JA, Schneeweiss S. Instrumental variable methods in comparative safety and effectiveness research. Pharmacoe-pidemiol Drug Saf 2010;19:537-54.
20. Terza JV, Basu A, Rathouz PJ. Two-stage residual inclusion estimation: addressing endogeneity in health econometric modeling. J Health Econ 2008;27:531-43.
21. Clark AM, Thompson DR. Heart failure disease management programmes: a new paradigm for research. Heart 2012;98:1476-7.
22. Badano LP, Di Lenarda A, Bellotti P, et al. Patients with chronic heart failure encountered in daily clinical practice are different from the "typical" patient enrolled in therapeutic trials. Ital Heart J 2003;4:84-91.
23. Damman K, Valente MA, Voors AA, et al. Renal impairment, worsening renal function, and outcome in patients with heart failure: an updated meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2014;35:455-69.
24. Silverman SL. From randomized controlled trials to observational studies. Am J Med 2009;122:114-20.
25. Lowery J, Hopp F, Subramanian U, et al. Evaluation of a nurse practitioner disease management model for chronic heart failure: a multi-site implementation study. Congest Heart Fail 2012;18:64-71.
26. Bonarek-Hessamfar M, Benchimol D, Lauribe P, et al. Multidisciplinary network in heart failure management in a community-based population: results and benefits at 2 years. Int J Cardiol 2009;134:120-2.
27. Klungel OH, Martens EP, Psaty BM, et al. Methods to assess intended effects of drug treatment in observational studies are reviewed. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:1223-31.
28. Salas M, Hofman A, Stricker BH. Confounding by indication: an example of variation in the use of epidemiologic terminology. Am J Epidemiol 1999;149:981-3.
29. Austin PC. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Stat Med 2013;32:2837-49.
30. Boef AG, Dekkers OM, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. Sample size importantly limits the usefulness of instrumental variable methods, depending on instrument strength and level of confounding. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67:1258-64.
31. Laborde-Casterot H, Agrinier N, Thilly N. Performing both propensity score and instrumental variable analyses in observational studies often leads to discrepant results: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:1232-40.
32. Jaarsma T, Stromberg A, De Geest S, et al. Heart failure management programmes in Europe. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2006;5:197-205.
33. Driscoll A, Worrall-Carter L, Hare DL, et al. Evidence-based chronic heart-failure management programmes: reality or myth? BMJ Qual Saf 2011;20:31-7.