Observational studyESC heart failure2021
The prehospital patient pathway and experience of care with acute heart failure: a comparison of two health care systems.
Observational study in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective analysis of management and outcomes of worsening heart failure in the outpatient setting.ESC heart failure · 2025Observational
- Optimization of Patient Pathway in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction and Worsening Heart Failure. Role of Vericiguat.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Review
- Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future.ESC heart failure · 2022Review
- Reassuring cardiac and non-cardiac outcomes for heart failure patients managed in a disease management programme during the COVID-19 pandemic.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2022Article
- The prehospital patient pathway and experience of care with acute heart failure: a comparison of two health care systems.ESC heart failure · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to analyse community management of patients during the symptomatic period prior to admission with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). METHODS AND
resultsWe conducted a prospective, two-centre, two-country observational study evaluating care pathways and patient experience in patients admitted to hospital with ADHF. Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered from patients, carers, and general practitioners (GPs). From the Irish centre, 114 patients enrolled, and from the English centre, 50 patients. Symptom duration longer than 72 h prior to hospitalization was noted among 70.4% (76) Irish and 80% (40) English patients, with no significant difference between those with a new diagnosis of HF [de novo HF (dnHF)] and those with known HF [established HF (eHF)] in either cohort. For the majority, dyspnoea was the dominant symptom; however, 63.3% (31) of these Irish patients and 47.2% (17) of these English patients did not recognize this as an HF symptom, with no significant difference between dnHF and eHF patients. Of the 46.5% (53) of Irish and 38% (19) of English patients reviewed exclusively by GPs before hospitalization, numbers prescribed diuretics were low (11.3%, six; and 15.8%, three, respectively); eHF patients were no more likely to receive diuretics than dnHF patients. Barriers to care highlighted by GPs included inadequate access to basic diagnostics, specialist support and up-to-date patient information, and lack of GP comfort in managing HF.
conclusionThe aforementioned findings, consistent across both health care jurisdictions, show a clear potential to intervene earlier and more effectively in ADHF or to prevent the need for hospitalization.
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.