Literature DB >> 23819955

A multicenter, randomized trial of a nurse-led, home-based intervention for optimal secondary cardiac prevention suggests some benefits for men but not for women: the Young at Heart study.

Melinda J Carrington1, Yih-Kai Chan, Alicia Calderone, Paul A Scuffham, Adrian Esterman, Stan Goldstein, Simon Stewart.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We examined the impact of a prolonged secondary prevention program on recurrent hospitalization in cardiac patients with private health insurance. METHODS AND
RESULTS: The Young at Heart multicenter, randomized, controlled trial compared usual postdischarge care (UC) with nurse-led, home-based intervention (HBI). The primary end point was rate of all-cause hospital stay (31.5±7.5 months follow-up). In total, 602 patients (aged 70±10 years, 72% men) were randomized to UC (n=296) or HBI (n=306, 96% received ≥1 home visit). Overall, 42 patients (7.0%) died, and 492 patients (82%) accumulated 2397 all-cause hospitalizations associated with 10,258 hospital days costing >$17 million. There were minimal group differences (HBI versus UC) in the primary end point of all-cause hospital stay (5405 versus 4853 days; median [interquartile range], 0.08 [0.03-0.17] versus 0.07 [0.03-0.13]/patient per month). There were similar trends with respect to all hospitalizations (1197 versus 1200; P=0.802) and associated costs ($8.66 versus $8.58 million; P=0.375). At 2 years, however, more HBI versus UC (39% versus 27%; odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-2.41; P=0.007) patients were assessed as stable and optimally managed. For women, HBI outcomes were predominantly worse than UC outcomes. In men, HBI was associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.99; P=0.044) with less cardiovascular hospitalizations (192 versus 269; P=0.054) and costs ($2.49 versus $3.53 million; P=0.046).
CONCLUSIONS: HBI did not reduce recurrent all-cause hospitalization compared with UC in privately insured cardiac patients overall. However, it did convey some benefits in cardiac outcomes for men. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Unique Identifier: 12608000014358. URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au/trial_view.aspx?id=82509.

Entities:  

Keywords:  follow-up studies; heart diseases; prevention and control

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23819955     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.000006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  7 in total

Review 1.  Professional, structural and organisational interventions in primary care for reducing medication errors.

Authors:  Hanan Khalil; Brian Bell; Helen Chambers; Aziz Sheikh; Anthony J Avery
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-10-04

2.  Comparison of the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D (SF-12) contemporaneous utility scores in patients with cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Sanjeewa Kularatna; Joshua Byrnes; Yih Kai Chan; Chantal F Ski; Melinda Carrington; David Thompson; Simon Stewart; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Impact of Nurse-Led, Multidisciplinary Home-Based Intervention on Event-Free Survival Across the Spectrum of Chronic Heart Disease: Composite Analysis of Health Outcomes in 1226 Patients From 3 Randomized Trials.

Authors:  Simon Stewart; Joshua F Wiley; Jocasta Ball; Yih-Kai Chan; Yasmin Ahamed; David R Thompson; Melinda J Carrington
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Cost-Effectiveness of a Home Based Intervention for Secondary Prevention of Readmission with Chronic Heart Disease.

Authors:  Joshua Byrnes; Melinda Carrington; Yih-Kai Chan; Christine Pollicino; Natalie Dubrowin; Simon Stewart; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Does a Nurse-Led Program of Support and Lifestyle Management for patients with coronary artery disease significantly improve psychological outcomes among the patients?: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zu-Chun Luo; Lu Zhai; Xia Dai
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.817

6.  Gender-specific secondary prevention? Differential psychosocial risk factors for major cardiovascular events.

Authors:  Christina E Kure; Yih-Kai Chan; Chantal F Ski; David R Thompson; Melinda J Carrington; Simon Stewart
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2016-04-12

Review 7.  Effective components of nurse-coordinated care to prevent recurrent coronary events: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Marjolein Snaterse; Jos Dobber; Patricia Jepma; Ron J G Peters; Gerben Ter Riet; S Matthijs Boekholdt; Bianca M Buurman; Wilma J M Scholte op Reimer
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 5.994

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.