ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease2025
Organization and structure of intensive care management of adult congenital heart disease in the United States.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Congenital heart disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- US Adult Congenital Heart Disease Fellowship Match Outcomes in the Context of the Global ACHD Workforce.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Review
- Organizational Factors to Support Collaborative Care in Adult Congenital Heart Disease Programs.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Critical Care of the Adult With Congenital Heart Disease.JACC. Advances · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The growing number of adults with congenital heart disease has led to the formation of dedicated centers to provide specialized care. There is a paucity of published data on the organization, staffing, and resources available when adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients are hospitalized in intensive care settings. This study aims to describe the delivery of intensive care for ACHD patients in the United States and identify key differences between accredited centers or those pending accreditation and non-accredited Adult Congenital Heart Association (ACHA) centers. Methods: A web-based cross-sectional survey targeting centers with specialized ACHD programs was conducted. Results: Data were obtained from 48 of 96 centers (50%). Twenty-seven (56%) were accredited by the ACHA and 8 (17%) were pending accreditation. Surgical ACHD patients were primarily co-managed by cardiologists and intensivists (n = 11, 23%) and treated within an adult cardiac surgical intensive care unit (n = 34, 72%). Compared to non-accredited centers, ACHA accredited centers or those pending accreditation were more likely to offer daily rounds with ACHD providers (30, 86% vs. 6, 46%, p=<0.01), were more likely to support an ACHD fellowship training program (16, 46% vs. 0, 0%, p=<0.01); and were more likely to have durable mechanical support, such as ventricular assist devices (35, 100% vs. 8, 62%, p < 0.01). Conclusion: This survey reports current trends in organization, staffing, and resources available to ACHD patients requiring intensive care. ACHA accredited centers or those pending accreditation were more likely to have dedicated ACHD rounds, fellowship training programs, and access to durable mechanical support.
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.