ArticleESC heart failure2025
Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary comprehensive heart failure management programme: A propensity-matched trial.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Reducing Heart Failure-Related Unplanned Readmissions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary comprehensive heart failure management programme: A propensity-matched trial.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDespite therapeutic advancements, the prognosis of heart failure (HF) remains poor, with high rates of mortality and readmission, particularly following a HF exacerbation. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary comprehensive HF management programme on HF patients. METHODS AND
resultsThis retrospective cohort study involved patients admitted for acute HF exacerbation at a regional hospital in Hong Kong. We established two patient cohorts: the control cohort, recruited between January and December 2021, received standard care, while the programme cohort, recruited from October 2022 to December 2023, participated in a comprehensive programme. This programme included multidisciplinary ward rounds, early initiation of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), discharge education, post-discharge transitional care and cardiac rehabilitation. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality and HF-related readmission at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included HF-related readmission and all-cause mortality. We also assessed patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the programme cohort. The study included 732 patients, 24.0% female, 81.6% with HFrEF, mean age of 67.9 ± 13.2 years. After matching for age, sex and type of HF, 366 patients were allocated to each cohort. The programme cohort demonstrated significantly lower rates of the composite endpoint [12.0% vs. 38.0%, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.19-0.37, P < 0.001]) and HF-related readmissions (10.1% vs. 25.4%, aHR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.24-0.52, P < 0.001) compared with the control cohort. All-cause mortality was also significantly reduced (4.4% vs. 18.3%, aHR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.13-0.38, P < 0.001). Improvements in HRQoL and high patient satisfaction were noted in the programme cohort.
conclusionsThe nurse-coordinated comprehensive HF management programme significantly reduced readmissions and mortality, with consistent benefits across different subgroups. Further research is needed to confirm these benefits and explore mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.