Clinical and utilization outcomes with short stay units vs hospital admission for lower risk decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Peter S. Pang, Sean P. Collins, Zachary L. Cox, Steven K. Roumpf, Christian C. Strachan, William Swigart, Mirian Ramirez, Benton R. Hunter
{"title":"Clinical and utilization outcomes with short stay units vs hospital admission for lower risk decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Peter S. Pang, Sean P. Collins, Zachary L. Cox, Steven K. Roumpf, Christian C. Strachan, William Swigart, Mirian Ramirez, Benton R. Hunter","doi":"10.1007/s10741-024-10436-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>With over 1 million primary heart failure (HF) hospitalizations annually, nearly 80% of patients who present to the emergency department with decompensated HF (DHF) are hospitalized. Short stay units (SSU) present an alternative to hospitalization, yet the effectiveness of the SSU strategy of care is not well known. This study is to determine the effectiveness of a SSU strategy compared with hospitalization in lower-risk patients with DHF. Our primary outcome was a composite of 30-day mortality and re-hospitalization. Key secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and re-hospitalization, costs, and 30-day days-alive-and-out-of-hospital (DAOOH). This is a systematic review and meta-analysis, following PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched from inception through February 2024. Either randomized trials or comparative observational studies were included if they compared outcomes between low-risk ED DHF patients admitted to an SSU (defined as an observation unit with expected stay ≤ 48 h) vs. admitted to the hospital. Two authors independently screened all titles and abstracts and then identified full texts for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed by two authors in parallel. The primary outcome was a composite of death or readmission within 30 days, reported as relative risk (RR), where a RR < 1 favored the SSU strategy. Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and re-hospitalization, costs, and 1-month days-alive-and-out-of-hospital (DAOOH). Of the 467 articles identified by our search strategy, only 3 full text articles were included. In meta-analysis for the primary outcome of 30-day death or readmission, the RR was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.56 to 1.63; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) for patients randomized to SSU vs hospitalization (2 studies, 241 patients). There were only 2 total deaths at 30 days in the 2 studies (total <i>N</i> = 258) which reported 30-day mortality, both in hospitalized patients. Only one study reported 90-day outcomes, showing no significant differences. Costs were lower in the SSU arm from one study, and 30-day DAOOH also favored SSU based on a single randomized trial. Based on very limited evidence, SSU provides similar efficacy for 30-day and 90-day mortality and readmission compared to hospitalization. An SSU strategy appears safe and may be cost effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":12950,"journal":{"name":"Heart Failure Reviews","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Failure Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-024-10436-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
With over 1 million primary heart failure (HF) hospitalizations annually, nearly 80% of patients who present to the emergency department with decompensated HF (DHF) are hospitalized. Short stay units (SSU) present an alternative to hospitalization, yet the effectiveness of the SSU strategy of care is not well known. This study is to determine the effectiveness of a SSU strategy compared with hospitalization in lower-risk patients with DHF. Our primary outcome was a composite of 30-day mortality and re-hospitalization. Key secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and re-hospitalization, costs, and 30-day days-alive-and-out-of-hospital (DAOOH). This is a systematic review and meta-analysis, following PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched from inception through February 2024. Either randomized trials or comparative observational studies were included if they compared outcomes between low-risk ED DHF patients admitted to an SSU (defined as an observation unit with expected stay ≤ 48 h) vs. admitted to the hospital. Two authors independently screened all titles and abstracts and then identified full texts for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed by two authors in parallel. The primary outcome was a composite of death or readmission within 30 days, reported as relative risk (RR), where a RR < 1 favored the SSU strategy. Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and re-hospitalization, costs, and 1-month days-alive-and-out-of-hospital (DAOOH). Of the 467 articles identified by our search strategy, only 3 full text articles were included. In meta-analysis for the primary outcome of 30-day death or readmission, the RR was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.56 to 1.63; I2 = 0%) for patients randomized to SSU vs hospitalization (2 studies, 241 patients). There were only 2 total deaths at 30 days in the 2 studies (total N = 258) which reported 30-day mortality, both in hospitalized patients. Only one study reported 90-day outcomes, showing no significant differences. Costs were lower in the SSU arm from one study, and 30-day DAOOH also favored SSU based on a single randomized trial. Based on very limited evidence, SSU provides similar efficacy for 30-day and 90-day mortality and readmission compared to hospitalization. An SSU strategy appears safe and may be cost effective.
期刊介绍:
Heart Failure Reviews is an international journal which develops links between basic scientists and clinical investigators, creating a unique, interdisciplinary dialogue focused on heart failure, its pathogenesis and treatment. The journal accordingly publishes papers in both basic and clinical research fields. Topics covered include clinical and surgical approaches to therapy, basic pharmacology, biochemistry, molecular biology, pathology, and electrophysiology.
The reviews are comprehensive, expanding the reader''s knowledge base and awareness of current research and new findings in this rapidly growing field of cardiovascular medicine. All reviews are thoroughly peer-reviewed before publication.