SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Comparative effectiveness of transitional care interventions for hospital-to-home transition in heart failure: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe transition from hospital to home represents a high-risk "vulnerable period" for patients with heart failure (HF). While numerous transitional care interventions (TCIs) have been developed, their relative efficacy and optimal hierarchy remain uncertain in the context of modern clinical practice.
objectiveTo evaluate and rank the effectiveness of different TCIs in reducing readmissions and mortality and improving quality of life (QoL) in hospitalized HF patients.
methodsWe updated the 2014 Feltner review by integrating its previously included RCTs with a new systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL (November 2013 to January 2025). Interventions were categorized into eight nodes: Home Visiting (HV), Multidisciplinary Clinics (MDC), Telemonitoring (TM), Structured Telephone Support (STS), Pharmacy-led Care (PHARM), Physical Rehabilitation (REHAB), Education (EDU), and Usual Care (UC). A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and interventions were ranked using P-scores.
resultsNineteen trials involving 11,452 patients were included. For all-cause readmission, HV was the only intervention significantly superior to UC (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.86) and was ranked highest (P-score = 0.902). For all-cause mortality, HV (P-score = 0.872) and MDC (P-score = 0.556) showed the highest probability of being best. Notably, MDC ranked first for reducing HF-specific readmission (P-score = 0.890), while REHAB and MDC were the most effective for enhancing Quality of Life (SMD ranking). TM showed moderate efficacy in mortality reduction but ranked poorly for readmission prevention.
conclusionNurse-led Home Visiting emerged as the highest-ranked strategy for reducing overall hospital utilization and mortality. Multidisciplinary clinics are superior for disease-specific stabilization, while physical rehabilitation is essential for improving functional well-being. A bundled approach integrating these elements should be prioritized in clinical pathways to optimize heart failure care transitions.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD420261299376.
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.