BACKGROUND: Despite a survival benefit and guideline recommendation for beta-blockers in left ventricular systolic dysfunction, beta-blockers are underused in clinical practice. METHODS:Medical practices with > or = 15 patients with heart failure (HF) in the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease (DDCD) were identified for a prospective, randomized study using a multifaceted intervention to improve beta-blocker use. Intervention practices received provider education, patient education materials, feedback on beta-blocker use of their patients with HF, and access to telephone consultation with an HF expert. The primary outcome was a comparison between intervention and control practices of the proportion of patients with HF self-reporting beta-blocker use on their first routine DDCD follow-up in the postintervention year. A random effects model was used for the analysis. RESULTS: Post intervention, 2631 patients (1701 in 23 intervention practices and 930 in 22 control practices) completed DDCD follow-up. No significant difference in the proportion of patients with HF reporting beta-blocker use was found in the intervention versus control groups (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.94-1.43, P = .2), although more patients in the intervention group started a beta-blocker than stopped a beta-blocker during the study period (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This multifaceted intervention did not significantly increase the mean proportion of patients taking beta-blockers within practices exposed to the intervention, although favorable trends were observed. Further studies are needed to identify and evaluate strategies for translating evidence into clinical practice to reduce the global health burden associated with HF.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Despite a survival benefit and guideline recommendation for beta-blockers in left ventricular systolic dysfunction, beta-blockers are underused in clinical practice. METHODS: Medical practices with > or = 15 patients with heart failure (HF) in the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease (DDCD) were identified for a prospective, randomized study using a multifaceted intervention to improve beta-blocker use. Intervention practices received provider education, patient education materials, feedback on beta-blocker use of their patients with HF, and access to telephone consultation with an HF expert. The primary outcome was a comparison between intervention and control practices of the proportion of patients with HF self-reporting beta-blocker use on their first routine DDCD follow-up in the postintervention year. A random effects model was used for the analysis. RESULTS: Post intervention, 2631 patients (1701 in 23 intervention practices and 930 in 22 control practices) completed DDCD follow-up. No significant difference in the proportion of patients with HF reporting beta-blocker use was found in the intervention versus control groups (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.94-1.43, P = .2), although more patients in the intervention group started a beta-blocker than stopped a beta-blocker during the study period (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This multifaceted intervention did not significantly increase the mean proportion of patients taking beta-blockers within practices exposed to the intervention, although favorable trends were observed. Further studies are needed to identify and evaluate strategies for translating evidence into clinical practice to reduce the global health burden associated with HF.
Authors: Jonathan G Howlett; Robert S McKelvie; Jeannine Costigan; Anique Ducharme; Estrellita Estrella-Holder; Justin A Ezekowitz; Nadia Giannetti; Haissam Haddad; George A Heckman; Anthony M Herd; Debra Isaac; Simon Kouz; Kori Leblanc; Peter Liu; Elizabeth Mann; Gordon W Moe; Eileen O'Meara; Miroslav Rajda; Samuel Siu; Paul Stolee; Elizabeth Swiggum; Shelley Zeiroth Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Frank Peters-Klimm; Stephen Campbell; Thomas Müller-Tasch; Dieter Schellberg; Goetz Gelbrich; Wolfgang Herzog; Joachim Szecsenyi Journal: Trials Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 2.279