Evidence Hub

Post-discharge prognosis of patients admitted to hospital for heart failure by world region, and national level of income and income disparity (REPORT-HF): a cohort study

J. Tromp, S. Bamadhaj, J. Cleland, C. Angermann, U. Dahlström, W. Ouwerkerk, Wan T. Tay, K. Dickstein et al.

Lancet Global Health, 2020

18 participants · 170 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is a global public health problem, affecting a large number of individuals from low-income and middle-income countries. REPORT-HF is, to our knowledge, the first prospective global registry collecting information on patient characteristics, management, and prognosis of acute heart failure using a single protocol. The aim of this study was to investigate differences in 1-year post-discharge mortality according to region, country income, and income inequality.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled during hospitalisation for acute heart failure from 358 centres in 44 countries on six continents. We stratified countries according to a modified WHO regional classification (Latin America, North America, western Europe, eastern Europe, eastern Mediterranean and Africa, southeast Asia, and western Pacific), country income (low, middle, high) and income inequality (according to tertiles of Gini index). Risk factors were identified on the basis of expert opinion and knowledge of the literature.

FINDINGS

Of 18 102 patients discharged, 3461 (20%) died within 1 year. Important predictors of 1-year mortality were old age, anaemia, chronic kidney disease, presence of valvular heart disease, left ventricular ejection fraction phenotype (heart failure with reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF] vs preserved ejection fraction [HFpEF]), and being on guideline-directed medical treatment (GDMT) at discharge (p$12 235 per capita) or lower income inequality (ie, from the lowest Gini…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free