Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29432132›Full record

Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2018

Outcomes of Heart Failure Admissions Under Observation Versus Short Inpatient Stay.

Ahmad Masri, Andrew D Althouse, Jeffrey McKibben, Floyd Thoma, Michael Mathier, Ravi Ramani, Jeffrey Teuteberg, Oscar Marroquin, Joon S Lee, Suresh R Mulukutla

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observation Versus Inpatient Stay for Heart Failure: Is It Semantics?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ahmad MasriHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Andrew D AlthouseHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Jeffrey McKibbenHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Floyd ThomaHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Michael MathierHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Ravi RamaniHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Jeffrey TeutebergDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Oscar MarroquinHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Joon S LeeHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Suresh R MulukutlaHeart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA mulukutlasr@upmc.edu.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center · USStanford University · USVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

InpatientsLength of StayObservationPatient AdmissionAgedAged, 80 and overCause of DeathFemaleHeart FailureHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient DischargePatient ReadmissionRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessmentadmission under observationdeathhealth policyheart failureoutcomes researchreadmission

Identifiers

PMID29432132
PMCPMC5850263
OpenAlexW2793846558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.