-
Eur. J. Heart Fail. · Jun 2015
Randomized Controlled TrialImpact of a nurse-led home and clinic-based secondary prevention programme to prevent progressive cardiac dysfunction in high-risk individuals: the Nurse-led Intervention for Less Chronic Heart Failure (NIL-CHF) randomized controlled study.
- Simon Stewart, Yih-Kai Chan, Chiew Wong, Garry Jennings, Paul Scuffham, Adrian Esterman, Melinda Carrington, and NIL-CHF Investigators.
- Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
- Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2015 Jun 1; 17 (6): 620-30.
AimsThe aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a long-term, nurse-led, multidisciplinary programme of home/clinic visits in preventing progressive cardiac dysfunction in individuals at risk of developing de novo chronic heart failure (CHF).Methods And ResultsA pragmatic, single-centre (tertiary-referral hospital with specialist cardiological services), open-label, randomized controlled trial with blinded endpoint adjudication was carried out. In total, 624 cardiac inpatients (66 ± 11 years, 71% male, and 70% with CAD) were randomly allocated (1:1) to standard care or the study intervention. The intention-to-treat cohort comprised 310 standard care and 301 intervention participants. During 51.0 ± 8.2 months follow-up, 38/310 (12%) standard care [mean event-free survival 1865 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1817-1913 days] vs. 41/301 (14%) intervention participants (1855 days, 95% CI 1804-1906 days) experienced the primary composite endpoint of de novo CHF hospitalization or all-cause mortality (P = 0.574). Although there were no statistically significant differences in the rate of cardiovascular-related and emergency hospitalizations, the NIL-CHF (Nurse-led Intervention for Less Chronic Heart Failure) group accumulated 478 (0.214 ± 0.70 vs. 0.095 ± 0.284 days/participant/month; P = 0.052) and 1097 fewer days of hospital stay (0.391 ± 1.80 vs. 0.199 ± 0.47 days/participant/month; P = 0.023), respectively, compared with standard care. The intervention group also showed better cardiac recovery on echocardiography at 3 years [81/226 (35.8%) vs. 56/225 (24.9%), odds ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.08-1.92, P = 0.011].ConclusionsRelative to a high level of standard care, the NIL-CHF intervention was ineffective in preventing CHF and rehospitalization. On the other hand, it was associated with reduced hospital stay and improved cardiac function over the long term.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (No. 12608000022369).© 2015 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2015 European Society of Cardiology.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.