ArticleESC heart failure2026
Reported decision-making regarding diuretic use and urinary sodium monitoring in acute heart failure: a vignette-based survey in three European countries.
Article in ESC heart failure, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo assess clinicians' decision-making in relation to guideline-recommended diuretic therapy, monitoring, and escalation strategies in acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS AND
resultsWe conducted a multinational, case-based cross-sectional survey among clinicians involved in heart failure management in Switzerland, Germany, and Austria. Participants responded to standardized hypothetical clinical vignettes addressing loop diuretic dosing, monitoring, and management of insufficient diuretic response in patients with AHF. Multivariable binomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with guideline-concordant initial diuretic dosing and use of urinary sodium measurement. A total of 787 clinicians participated. Guideline-concordant initial loop diuretic dosing was reported by 53.4% of respondents for diuretic-naive patients and by 87.7% for patients receiving chronic diuretic therapy. Treatment monitoring using urinary sodium measurement was reported by 16.9%. In multivariable regression analysis, urinary sodium measurement was more frequent in Switzerland (OR 3.36; 95% CI 2.09-5.42) and Austria (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.12-6.22) compared to Germany. General practitioners/internal medicine physicians (OR 3.52, 95% CI 1.83-6.79), resident physicians (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.50-4.51), and prehospital emergency physicians (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.08-4.03) showed higher odds of urinary sodium measurement compared to emergency medicine physicians. In rural settings, odds were lower compared to urban settings (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.88). In case of insufficient diuretic response, 64.6% favoured escalation via sequential nephron blockade.
conclusionReported decision-making showed substantial variability regarding diuretic treatment monitoring and escalation strategies. Urinary sodium measurement was infrequently selected and may represent a potential target for future educational efforts.
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.