Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29633886›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2018

Comorbidities, risk factors and outcomes in patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction of more than or equal to 40% in primary care- and hospital care-based outpatient clinics.

B Eriksson, P Wändell, U Dahlström, P Näsman, L H Lund, M Edner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Older patients with heart failure managed in primary care versus cardiology care: a register-based study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

B Erikssona Division of Family Medicine, Department of Neurobiology , Care Sciences and Society (NVS), Karolinska Institutet , Huddinge , Sweden.
P Wändellb Division of Family Medicine , NVS, Karolinska Institutet , Sweden.
U Dahlströmc Department of Cardiology and Department of Medical and Health Sciences , Linköping University , Sweden Linköping.
P Näsmand Centre for Safety Research , KTH Royal Institute of Technology , Stockholm , Sweden.
L H Lunde Karolinska Institutet, Department of Medicine, Unit of Cardiology , Karolinska University Hospital , Stockholm , Sweden.
M Ednerf Cardiology Unit, N3: 06, Department of Medicine , Karolinska Institute and University Hospital , Stockholm , Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study is to describe patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction (EF) of more than or equal to 40%, managed in both Primary- and Hospital based outpatient clinics separately with their prognosis, comorbidities and risk factors. Further to compare the heart failure medication in the two groups.

designWe used the prospective Swedish Heart Failure Registry to include 9654 out-patients who had HF and EF ≥40%, 1802 patients were registered in primary care and 7852 in hospital care. Descriptive statistical tests were used to analyze base line characteristics in the two groups and multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess mortality rate in the groups separately.

settingThe prospective Swedish Heart Failure Registry. SUBJECTS: Patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction (EF) of more than or equal to 40%.

main outcome measuresComorbidities, risk factors and mortality.

resultsMean-age was 77.5 (primary care) and 70.3 years (hospital care) p < 0.0001, 46.7 vs. 36.3% women respectively (p < 0.0001) and EF ≥50% 26.1 vs. 13.4% (p < 0.0001). Co-morbidities were common in both groups (97.2% vs. 92.3%), the primary care group having more atrial fibrillation, hypertension, ischemic heart disease and COPD. According to the multivariate logistic regression analysis smoking, COPD and diabetes were the most important independent risk factors in the primary care group and valvular disease in the hospital care group. All-cause mortality during mean follow-up of almost 4 years was 31.5% in primary care and 27.8% in hospital care. One year-mortality rates were 7.8%, and 7.0% respectively.

conclusionAny co-morbidity was noted in 97% of the HF-patients with an EF of more than or equal to 40% managed at primary care based out-patient clinics and these patients had partly other independent risk factors than those patients managed in hospital care based outpatients clinics. Our results indicate that more attention should be payed to manage COPD in the primary care group. KEY POINTS 97% of heart failure patients with an ejection fraction of more than or equal to 40% managed at primary care based out-patient clinics had any comorbidity. Patients in primary care had partly other independent risk factors than those in hospital care. All-cause mortality during mean follow-up of almost 4 years was higher in primary care compared to hospital care. In matched HF-patients RAS-antagonists, beta-blockers as well as the combination of the two drugs were more seldom prescribed when managed in primary care compared with hospital care.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareHospitalsPrimary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overAtrial FibrillationComorbidityDiabetes ComplicationsFemaleHeart FailureHeart Valve DiseasesHumansHypertensionLogistic ModelsMaleMyocardial IschemiaHeart failureoutcomepreserved ejection fractionprimary carerisk factors

Identifiers

PMID29633886
PMCPMC6066291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.