ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2020
Characteristics of current heart failure patients admitted to internal medicine vs. cardiology hospital units: the VASCO study.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy among patients with acute heart failure admitted to cardiac rehabilitation: the PROMETEO registry.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- Impact of an intensive follow-up program on the outcome of acute heart failure patients hospitalized in internal medicine versus cardiology units: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Heart Failure in Older Adults: Real-World Outcomes and Patient Profiles by Admission Service and Sex.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Lower albumin levels are associated with 1-year mortality in older patients hospitalized for acute heart failure: THE ALBIMED-HF study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Referral of the heart failure patient from cardiology and internal medicine department: Same patients and same rehabilitative approach?International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2024Review
- Machine learning and LACE index for predicting 30-day readmissions after heart failure hospitalization in elderly patients.Internal and emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Inferior Vena Cava Edge Tracking Echocardiography: A Promising Tool with Applications in Multiple Clinical Settings.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical Characteristics and Predictors of In-Hospital Mortality among Older Patients with Acute Heart Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Characteristics of current heart failure patients admitted to internal medicine vs. cardiology: are we still caring for two different populations?Internal and emergency medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The majority of patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) are admitted to internal medicine (IM) rather than to cardiology (CA) units, but to date few studies have analyzed the characteristics of these two populations. In this snapshot survey, we compared consecutive patients admitted for HF in six IM units vs. one non-intensive CA unit. During the 6-month survey period, 467 patients were enrolled (127 in CA, 27.2% vs. 340 in IM, 72.8%). IM patients were almost 10 years older (CA 75 ± 10, IM 82 ± 8 years; p < 0.001), more frequently female (CA 39%, IM 55%; p = 0.002) and living at home alone (CA 12%, IM 21%; p = 0.017). The leading cause of hospitalization in both groups was acute worsening of HF (CA 42%, IM 53%; p = 0.031), followed by atrial fibrillation (CA 29%, IM 12%; p < 0.001) and infections (CA 24%, IM 27%; p = 0.563). Ischemic (CA 43%, IM 30%; p = 0.008) and dilated cardiomyopathy patients (CA 21%, IM 12%; p < 0.001) were primarily admitted to CA unit, whereas those with hypertensive heart disease to IM (CA 3%, IM 39%; p < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was available in 96% of CA patients, but only in 60% of IM patients (p = 0.001). Among patients with LVEF measured, those with LVEF < 40% were predominantly admitted to CA (CA 60%, IM 14%; p < 0.001), whereas those with LVEF ≥ 50% were admitted to IM (CA 21%, IM 33%; p = 0.019); 26% of IM patients were discharged without a known LVEF. Medical treatments also significantly differed, according to patients' clinical and instrumental characteristics in each unit. This study demonstrates important differences between HF patients hospitalized in CA vs. IM, and the need for a greater interaction between these two medical specialties for a better care of HF patients.
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.