Observational studyESC heart failure2022
Public assistance in patients with acute heart failure: a report from the KCHF registry.
Observational study in ESC heart failure, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02334891 (Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure Study), which is not on this 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.
Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure Study
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of public assistance on long-term outcomes after hospitalization for acute heart failure.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of an Impella Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Who Received Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Recipients of public assistance with advanced chronic kidney disease: insights into receiving a presentation of kidney replacement therapy options and polypharmacy from Japanese investigators with innovative network about kidney disease study.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2025Article
- Health Statuses of People in Poverty Receiving Public Assistance in Japan: A Scoping Review.JMA journal · 2024Article
- Public assistance in patients with acute heart failure: a report from the KCHF registry.ESC heart failure · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThere is a scarcity of data on the post-discharge prognosis in acute heart failure (AHF) patients with a low-income but receiving public assistance. The study sought to evaluate the differences in the clinical characteristics and outcomes between AHF patients receiving public assistance and those not receiving public assistance. METHODS AND
resultsThe Kyoto Congestive Heart Failure registry was a physician-initiated, prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study enrolling 4056 consecutive patients who were hospitalized due to AHF for the first time between October 2014 and March 2016. The present study population consisted of 3728 patients who were discharged alive from the index AHF hospitalization. We divided the patients into two groups, those receiving public assistance and those not receiving public assistance. After assessing the proportional hazard assumption of public assistance as a variable, we constructed multivariable Cox proportional hazard models to estimate the risk of the public assistance group relative to the no public assistance group. There were 218 patients (5.8%) receiving public assistance and 3510 (94%) not receiving public assistance. Patients in the public assistance group were younger, more frequently had chronic coronary artery disease, previous heart failure hospitalizations, current smoking, poor medical adherence, living alone, no occupation, and a lower left ventricular ejection fraction than those in the no public assistance group. During a median follow-up of 470 days, the cumulative 1 year incidences of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalizations after discharge did not differ between the public assistance group and no public assistance group (13.3% vs. 17.4%, P = 0.10, and 28.3% vs. 23.8%, P = 0.25, respectively). After adjusting for the confounders, the risk of the public assistance group relative to the no public assistance group remained insignificant for all-cause death [hazard ratio (HR), 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-1.32; P = 0.84]. Even after taking into account the competing risk of all-cause death, the adjusted risk within 180 days in the public assistance group relative to the no public assistance group remained insignificant for heart failure hospitalizations (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.34; P = 0.69), while the adjusted risk beyond 180 days was significant (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.07-2.29; P = 0.02).
conclusionsThe AHF patients receiving public assistance as compared with those not receiving public assistance had no significant excess risk for all-cause death at 1 year after discharge or a heart failure hospitalization within 180 days after discharge, while they did have a significant excess risk for heart failure hospitalizations beyond 180 days after discharge. CLINICAL
trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02334891 (NCT02334891) and https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000017241 (UMIN000015238).
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.