Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2018
Outcomes of Heart Failure Admissions Under Observation Versus Short Inpatient Stay.
Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Acute Heart Failure: From The Emergency Department to the Intensive Care Unit.Cardiology clinics · 2024Review
- Pain and Heart Failure During Transport by Emergency Medical Services and Its Associated Outcomes: Hospitalization, Mortality, and Length of Stay.Western journal of nursing research · 2024Article
- Expenditure on Heart Failure in the United States: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2009-2018.JACC. Heart failure · 2022Article
- Assessment of Hospital Readmissions From the Emergency Department After Implementation of Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Observation Versus Inpatient Stay for Heart Failure: Is It Semantics?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Article
- The cost impact to Medicare of shifting treatment of worsening heart failure from inpatient to outpatient management settings.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with heart failure (HF) are admitted either under observation (OBS) or inpatient stays; however, there is little data on whether this designation reflects the clinical status of a patient, with significant logistical and financial implications. We sought to compare the outcomes of patients with HF admitted OBS versus inpatient stay (≤2 days; INPT). METHODS AND
resultsFrom January 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015, our multisite health system saw 21 339 unique patients totaling 52 493 hospital admissions with a primary diagnosis of HF. Patients were excluded if they underwent cardiac surgery (n=611), heart transplantation (n=187), or left ventricular assist device insertion (n=198), or if they died during hospitalization (n=1839). Of the remaining 50 654 discharges, 2 groups were identified: INPT group and OBS group. Outcomes were HF readmission, all-cause readmission, and all-cause mortality within 1 year of discharge. Hazard ratios were computed using the Andersen-Gill method in the Cox proportional-hazards model. A total of 8709 admissions (17%) occurred in the INPT group and 2648 admissions (5%) occurred in the OBS group. HF readmission rate at 1 year was 55.3% in INPT versus 66.5% in OBS (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.80;
conclusionsHF admissions designated INPTs were associated with lower readmission rates and equivalent mortality to those designated OBS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.