ArticleESC heart failure2023
Global differences in acute heart failure treatment: analysis of the STRONG-HF site feasibility questionnaire.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attitudes towards using single-pill combination (polypill) therapy in heart failure: patients' and physicians' perspectives.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Heart Failure and Comorbidities (Chronic Kidney Disease, Diabetes, Obesity) Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach.Cardiorenal medicine · 2026Review
- Treatment outcome and associated factors of acute heart failure in East Africa, an Ethiopian perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Review
- Design and rationale of the eLym™ System for Decompensation of Excess Lymphatic Fluid via the Thoracic Duct in Acute Heart Failure (DELTA-HF).ESC heart failure · 2025Article
- Counteracting the Mechanisms of Heart Failure is the Most Effective Way to Decongest Patients while Improving Outcomes.Cardiac failure review · 2025Review
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Heart Failure: A Retrospective Observational Study and Medical Audit.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- High-intensity care for GDMT titration.Heart failure reviews · 2024Review
- Global differences in acute heart failure treatment: analysis of the STRONG-HF site feasibility questionnaire.ESC heart failure · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAcute heart failure (AHF) has an impact on human health worldwide. Despite guidelines for treatment and management of AHF, mortality rates remain high. The main objective of this study was to compare standard in-hospital treatment and management of AHF against current clinical guidelines and variations across regions.
methodsBetween February 2018 and May 2021, investigators were approached to participate in the STRONG-HF study. The lead investigator at 158 sites in 20 countries completed a site feasibility questionnaire. Sites were grouped by country into five different regions: Africa and the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Russia, South America, and Western Europe.
resultsAccording to the questionnaires, there are large differences in how patients present due to AHF and where in the hospital they are treated. There were significant differences in reported percentage of AHF patients receiving angiotensin converting enzymes inhibitors across the regions (P < 0.001), mostly due to prescription of more angiotensin II receptor blockers and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors in South America and Western Europe. Reported beta-blocker use was high across all of the regions. Device therapy and percutaneous interventions were more common in Europe. Sites reported a 5 to 8 day length of stay, while in Russia most have a 10 to 12 day length of stay. Regions reported that AHF patients follow up with a community cardiologist or general practitioner post-discharge, although follow-up was commonly more than 1 month post discharge, and not all sites had the capability to measure natriuretic peptides post discharge.
conclusionsIn this analysis of feasibility questionnaires, most sites reported general adherence to ESC guidelines for treatment and management of AHF patients although percutaneous and device therapy was less common outside Europe and follow-up after discharge took place late and was not as extensive as recommended. There were wide variations seen within and across regions in some areas.
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.