Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade Research Articles

Abstract 12085: Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) Score Quintiles Correlate With Short and Long-Term Healthcare Costs

Introduction: The use of the EHMRG model in the emergency department (ED) has been demonstrated to improve outcomes for patients presenting with acute heart failure (HF). It is unknown if the EHMRG model also correlates with healthcare costs, which has not been examined in other HF risk models. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that patients with higher EHMRG risk scores, i.e., sicker, would have higher costs of care in short-term (30-day) and longer-term (up to 2 year) time horizons. Methods: We examined direct costs of care from a health payer perspective using the original EHMRG derivation cohort of 11,857 patients hospitalized with acute HF in Ontario, Canada (from 2004) and linking to population-based case-costing databases. Costs were stratified by the quintiles of the EHMRG risk score (Q1 = lowest risk, Q5 = highest risk). Costs (in 2021 Canadian dollars) were categorized into hospital, physician, drug, home care, long term care (LTC), and other costs. Results: Patients in the lowest EHMRG risk quintile (Q1), compared to higher quintiles (Q2-Q5) had lower total cost of care in both the short-term ($8,113 vs $9,442, $10,557, $12,078 and $15,005, p <0.001) and long-term ($46,661 vs $55,904, $58,904, $63,286 and $64,229, p<0.001). This positive correlation between EHMRG risk quintile and cost of care was also observed for hospital costs ($26,388 [Q1] vs $35,659 [Q5], p<.0001) and LTC costs ($1,236 [Q1] vs $6,316 [Q5], p<.0001) at all time intervals, including at 2 years shown here. Physician costs and drug costs were positively correlated with EHMRG risk quintiles at 30 days (physician: $1,241 [Q1] vs $1,762 [Q5], p<0.0001; drug: $219 [Q1] vs $282 [Q5], p<.0001), and negatively correlated at 2 years (physician: $7,943 [Q1] vs $7,175 [Q5], p<.0001; drug: $4,539 [Q1] vs $4,377 [Q5], p<.0001). There was an increasing trend of costs irrespective of the formulation of the EHMRG risk score as 7-day risk quintile, 30-day risk quintile, or 30-day risk tertile. Conclusion: The EHMRG7 risk score was positively correlated with healthcare costs from 30 days to 2 years after initial ED presentation. This novel correlational study demonstrated that in the absence of an associated intervention, higher mortality risk in HF patients portends higher costs in short and long-term follow-up.

What are the Data for Current Prognostic Tools Used to Determine the Risk of Short-Term Adverse Events in Patients with Acute Heart Failure?

BackgroundAcute heart failure (AHF) is a common condition evaluated in the emergency department (ED). Patients may present with a wide range of signs and symptoms, comorbidities, exacerbating factors, and ability to follow-up. Having a decision tool to objectively assess the risk of near-term events would help guide disposition decisions in these patients. Clinical QuestionWhat are the data for current tools used to determine the short-term risk of adverse events of patients with AHF in the ED setting? Evidence ReviewStudies retrieved included six prospective studies and three retrospective cohort studies that evaluated the following five different risk scores that may predict the risk of serious adverse events in those with AHF: Ottawa Heart Failure Risk Score (OHFRS), Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG), EHMRG at 30 days with addition of an ST depression variable (EHMRG30-ST), Multiple Estimation of Risk Based on the Emergency Department Spanish 40 Score in Patients with AHF Score (MEESSI-AHF), and the Improving Heart Failure Risk Stratification in the ED (STRATIFY) tool. ConclusionsBased on the available literature, risk scores, including the OHFRS; EHMRG; EHMRG30-ST; MEESSI-AHF; and STRATIFY, can help identify short-term risk of adverse events, but are insufficient in isolation. Clinicians should use these tools in conjunction with other factors, such as the patient's symptom trajectory, hemodynamics, and access to follow-up care.

Retrospective validation of acute heart failure risk stratification in the emergency department

BackgroundHeart Failure (HF) is a primary diagnosis for hospital admission from the Emergency Department (ED), although not all patients require hospitalization. The Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) estimates 7-day mortality in patients with acute HF in ED settings, but further validation is needed in the United States (US). ObjectivesTo validate EHMRG scores by risk-stratifying patients with acute HF in a large tertiary healthcare center in the US and analyze outcome measures to determine if EHMRG risk scores safely identify low-risk groups that may be discharged or managed in ED observation units (EDOUs). MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis of 304 patients with acute HF presenting to an ED at a large, tertiary healthcare center was completed. EHMRG scores were calculated to stratify patients according to published thresholds. Mortality and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates were analyzed. ResultsNo deaths occurred in very low and low-risk EHMRG groups at 7 days post discharge. 30-day mortality was significantly less in the lower risk groups (3.1%) when compared to all other patients (11.1%). MACE rates at 30 days in the very low risk group (15%) were significantly less when compared to all other patients (31.3%). Hospitalizations occurred in 23.4% of patients in lower risk groups. ConclusionsED risk stratification with EHMRG differentiates high-risk patients requiring hospitalization from lower risk patients who can be safely managed in alternative settings with good outcomes. Data supports improved pathways for patients with acute HF during a time of high hospital volumes.

Implementation of EHMRG Risk Model in an Italian Population of Elderly Patients with Acute Heart Failure.

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a cardiac emergency with an increasing incidence, especially among elderly patients. The Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) has been validated to assess the 7-days AHF mortality risk, suggesting the management of patients admitted to an emergency department (ED). EHMRG has never been implemented in Italian ED nor among elderly patients. We aimed to assess EHMRG score accuracy in predicting in-hospital death in a retrospective cohort of elderly subjects admitted for AHF from the ED to an Internal Medicine Department. We enrolled, in a 24-months timeframe, all the patients admitted to an Internal Medicine Department from ED for AHF. We calculated the EHMRG score, subdividing patients into six categories, and assessing in-hospital mortality and length of stay. We evaluated EHMRG accuracy with ROC curve analysis and survival with Kaplan–Meier and Cox models. We collected 439 subjects, with 45 in-hospital deaths (10.3%), observing a significant increase of in-hospital death along with EHMRG class, from 0% (class 1) to 7.7% (class 5b; p < 0.0001). EHMRG was fairly accurate in the whole cohort (AUC: 0.75; 95%CI: 0.68–0.83; p < 0.0001), with the best cutoff observed at >103 (Se: 71.1%; Sp: 72.8%; LR+: 2.62; LR-: 0.40; PPV: 23.0%; NPV: 95.7%), but performed better considering the events in the first seven days of admission (AUC: 0.83; 95%; CI: 0.75–0.91; p < 0.0001). In light of our observations, EHMRG can be useful also for the Italian emergency system to predict the risk of short-term mortality for AHF among elderly patients. EHMRG performance was better in the first seven days but remained acceptable when considering the whole period of hospitalization.

Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade may help to reduce heart failure admissions.

IntroductionHospital admissions for heart failure (HF) are frequent and pose a heavy burden on health care resources. Currently, the decision to hospitalise is based on clinical judgement rather than on prognostic risk stratification. The Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) was recently developed to identify high-risk HF patients in the emergency department (ED).ObjectiveTo assess the ability of the EHMRG to predict 30-day mortality in Dutch HF patients visiting the ED and to evaluate whether the EHMRG could help to reduce the number of hospital admissions for decompensated HF.MethodsPatients visiting the ED for decompensated HF were included. The decision to hospitalise or discharge was based on clinical judgement. The EHMRG was calculated retrospectively. Based on their EHMRG, patients were stratified as very low risk, low risk, intermediate risk, high risk and very high risk.ResultsIn 227 patients (age 73 ± 12 years, 69% male) 30-day mortality was 11%. Mortality differed significantly among the EHMRG risk groups at 7‑day (p = 0.012) and 30-day follow-up (p < 0.01). Based on clinical judgement, 76% of patients were hospitalised. If decision-making had been based on EHMRG, the hospitalisation rate could have been reduced to 66% (p < 0.01), particularly by reducing hospitalisations in patients at low risk of death. Mortality in discharged patients, whether the decision was based on EHMRG or clinical judgement, was 0%.ConclusionThe EHMRG accurately differentiates between high- and low-risk decompensated HF patients visiting the ED, making it a promising tool to safely reduce the number of HF admissions.Supplementary InformationThe online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-022-01661-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving the EHMRG Prognostic Evaluation of Acute Heart Failure with TAPSE/PASp: A Sequential Approach.

The Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) can predict short-term mortality in patients admitted for acute heart failure (AHF) in the emergency department (ED). This paper aimed to evaluate if TAPSE/PASp, an echocardiographic marker of ventricular desynchronization, can improve in-hospital death prediction in patients at moderate-to-high risk, according to EHMRG score classification. From 1 January 2018 to 30 December 2019, we retrospectively enrolled all the consecutive subjects admitted to our Internal Medicine Department for AHF from the ED. We performed bedside echocardiography within the first 24 h of admission. We evaluated EHMRG and NYHA in the ED, days of admission in Internal Medicine, and in-hospital mortality. We assessed cutoffs with ROC curve analysis and survival with Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression. We obtained a cohort of 439 subjects; 10.3% underwent in-hospital death. Patients with normal TAPSE/PASp in EHMRG Classes 4, 5a, and 5b had higher survival rates (100%, 100%, and 94.3%, respectively), while subjects with pathologic TAPSE/PASp had lower survival rates (81.8%, 78.3%, and 43.4%, respectively) (p < 0.0001, log-rank test). TAPSE/PASp, an echocardiographic marker of ventricular desynchronization, can further stratify the risk of in-hospital death evaluated by EHMRG.

The role of acute heart failure index (AHFI) combined with emergency heart failure mortality risk grade (EHMRG) in the evaluation of clinical outcomes and prognosis in patients with acute heart failure

Objective To investigate clinical value for the risk model of acute heart failure index (AHFI) combined with emergency heart failure mortality risk grade (EHMRG) in evaluating clinical outcomes and prognosis of patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Methods The present prospective observational cohort study enrolled a total of 228 patients with AHF who were admitted to our hospital from January 2019 to January 2020. The AHF patients were divided into four groups: (1) the high AHFI and high EHMRG group, n = 61; (2) the low AHFI and low EHMRG group, n = 92; (3) the high AHFI and low EHMRG group, n = 34; (4) the low AHFI and high EHMRG group, n = 41. AHFI and EHMRG were used to identify the risk of death for AHF patients. Serum levels of Troponin I, B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), and NT-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were detected by the ELISA method. Kaplan-Meier curve was performed for analysis of survival time and a logistic regression model was used to analyse 1-year mortality of patients. Pearson’s analysis was used to determine the correlation between biomarkers and EHMRG. Results AHFI combined with the EHMRG model was associated with cardiac function status and EHMRG score was positively related to the level of Troponin I, BNP, and NT-proBNP. AHF high-risk AHFI and high-risk EHMRG indicated that patients might have a higher incidence of MACEs during hospitalisation. In addition, AHFI and high-risk EHMRG groups had shorter survival times, and AHFI was associated with 1-year mortality and was the risk factor for 1-year mortality. Conclusion AHFI combined with a high EHMRG risk model was associated with clinical outcomes and prognosis.

Rationale and design of the comparison of outcomes and access to care for heart failure (COACH) trial: A stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

Heart failure (HF) is an ambulatory care sensitive condition and a leading reason for emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Improved decision-making and care may enhance safety and efficiency for patients presenting to the ED with acute HF. We will evaluate an intervention comprised of 2 complementary components: (1) the Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade simultaneous 7- and 30-day (EHMRG30-ST) risk scores, which will inform admission-discharge decisions, and (2) a rapid outpatient follow-up (RAPID-HF) clinic for low-to-intermediate risk patients on cardiovascular readmissions or death. Stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with cross-sectional measurement at 10 acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Patients presenting during control and intervention periods are eligible if they have a primary ED diagnosis of HF. In the intervention periods, access to the EHMRG30-ST web calculator will become available to hospitals' internet protocol (IP) addresses, and referral to the RAPID-HF clinic will be facilitated by a study nurse navigator. Patients with a high risk EHMRG30-ST score will be admitted to hospital. The RAPID-HF clinic will accept referrals for patients: (1) with low risk 7- and 30-day EHMRG30-ST scores who are discharged directly from the ED, or (2) intermediate risk patients with hospital length of stay < 72 hours. The RAPID-HF clinic, staffed by a nurse-clinician and cardiologist, will provide care during the 30-day transition after hospital separation. This trial will determine whether novel risk stratification coupled with rapid ambulatory care achieves better outcomes than conventional decision-making and care for patients with HF.

Performance of Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade in the Emergency Department.

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to validate and assess the performance of the Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) to predict seven-day mortality in US patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute congestive heart failure (CHF) exacerbation.MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review on patients presenting to the ED with acute CHF exacerbation between January 2014–January 2016 across eight EDs in New York. We identified patients using codes from the International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10 Revisions, or who were diagnosed with CHF in the ED. Inclusion criteria were patients ≥ 18 years of age who presented to the ED for acute CHF. Exclusion criteria included the following: end-stage renal disease related heart failure; < 18 years of age; pregnancy; palliative care; renal failure; and “do not resuscitate” directive. The primary outcome was seven-day mortality. We used mixed-effects logistic regression models to estimate C-statistics and continuous net reclassification index for events and nonevents.ResultsWe identified 3,320 ED visits associated with suspected CHF among 2,495 unique patients. Of the 3,320 ED visits, 94.7% patients were admitted to the hospital and 3.4% were discharged. The median age was 78.6 (interquartile range 68.01 – 86.76). There was an overall seven-day mortality of 2%, an inpatient mortality rate of 2.4%, and no mortality among the discharge group. Adding EHMRG to the risk prediction model improved the C-statistic (from 0.748 to 0.772) and led to a higher degree of reclassification for both events and nonevents.ConclusionThe EHMRG can be used as a valuable and effective screening tool in the US while considering disposition decision for patients with acute CHF exacerbation. Emergency medical services transport and metolazone use is much higher in the US population as compared to the Canadian population. We observed minimal to no short-term mortality among discharged CHF patients from the ED.

Prediction of short-term mortality in acute heart failure patients using minimal electronic health record data

BackgroundAcute heart failure (AHF) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Effective patient risk stratification is essential to guiding hospitalization decisions and the clinical management of AHF. Clinical decision support systems can be used to improve predictions of mortality made in emergency care settings for the purpose of AHF risk stratification. In this study, several models for the prediction of seven-day mortality among AHF patients were developed by applying machine learning techniques to retrospective patient data from 236,275 total emergency department (ED) encounters, 1881 of which were considered positive for AHF and were used for model training and testing. The models used varying subsets of age, sex, vital signs, and laboratory values. Model performance was compared to the Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) model, a commonly used system for prediction of seven-day mortality in the ED with similar (or, in some cases, more extensive) inputs. Model performance was assessed in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity.ResultsWhen trained and tested on a large academic dataset, the best-performing model and EHMRG demonstrated test set AUROCs of 0.84 and 0.78, respectively, for prediction of seven-day mortality. Given only measurements of respiratory rate, temperature, mean arterial pressure, and FiO2, one model produced a test set AUROC of 0.83. Neither a logistic regression comparator nor a simple decision tree outperformed EHMRG.ConclusionsA model using only the measurements of four clinical variables outperforms EHMRG in the prediction of seven-day mortality in AHF. With these inputs, the model could not be replaced by logistic regression or reduced to a simple decision tree without significant performance loss. In ED settings, this minimal-input risk stratification tool may assist clinicians in making critical decisions about patient disposition by providing early and accurate insights into individual patient’s risk profiles.

Acuity patterns of heart failure among emergency departments in a large health system.

The prognostic importance of Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) score in assessing short term mortality in Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) patients has been validated in the past, however, few studies have examined acuity patterns in the CHF population across healthcare settings. We aim to understand acuity patterns of CHF patients across a large health system for better resource utilization. Retrospective chart review of adult patients with acute CHF in a large Metropolitan health system was performed in 3 community and 3 academic hospitals between January 2014 and January 2016. We collected demographic data, setting type, and calculated EHMRG score. Descriptive analysis of each hospital and mixed-effects negative binomial models were created to see patterns of acuity versus hospital volume. A total of 3312 Emergency Department (ED) visits among 2490 unique patients were included. Academic and community hospitals had 2168 patients and 1144 patients, respectively. Hospitals with higher volume treated a large amount of lower acuity patients. Academic hospitals had 30% of CHF ED visits in the lowest EHMRG quantile versus 20% at community hospital (p<0.0001). Compared to EHMRG quantile 5b, hospital volume was 17%, 8% and 5% higher in quantile 1, 2, and 3 with a p-value less than 0.05 (IRR=1.17; 1.08;1.05), respectively, but were not significant compared to quantile 4 and 5a. Revisit rates were lower in academic hospitals; admission rates were lower in community hospitals. Academic hospitals had a higher number of Acute Heart Failure (AHF) patients, larger number of low acuity patients, higher admission rates, but less revisit rates to the ED as compared to community hospitals. We suggest acuity specific interventions will help decrease admission and revisit rates.

Risk stratification scores for patients with acute heart failure in the Emergency Department: A systematic review.

This study aimed to systematically identify and summarise all risk scores evaluated in the emergency department setting to stratify acute heart failure patients. A systematic review of PubMed and Web of Science was conducted including all multicentre studies reporting the use of risk predictive models in emergency department acute heart failure patients. Exclusion criteria were: (a) non-original articles; (b) prognostic models without predictive purposes; and (c) risk models without consecutive patient inclusion or exclusively tested in patients admitted to a hospital ward. We identified 28 studies reporting findings on 19 scores: 13 were originally derived in the emergency department (eight exclusively using acute heart failure patients), and six in emergency department and hospitalised patients. The outcome most frequently predicted was 30-day mortality. The performance of the scores tended to be higher for outcomes occurring closer to the index acute heart failure event. The eight scores developed using acute heart failure patients only in the emergency department contained between 4-13 predictors (age, oxygen saturation and creatinine/urea included in six scores). Five scores (Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade, Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade 30 Day mortality ST depression, Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency department 3 Day, Acute Heart Failure Risk Score, and Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure) have been externally validated in the same country, and two (Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade and Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure) further internationally validated. The c-statistic for Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade to predict seven-day mortality was between 0.74-0.81 and for Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure to predict 30-day mortality was 0.80-0.84. There are several scales for risk stratification of emergency department acute heart failure patients. Two of them are accurate, have been adequately validated and may be useful in clinical decision-making in the emergency department i.e. about whether to admit or discharge.

Abstract P479: Feasibility Study to Compare Heart Failure Risk Prediction Tools in the Emergency Department

Background: In United States (US) emergency departments (ED), ~80% of patients presenting with exacerbation of heart failure (HF) symptoms are admitted to the hospital. However, some patients are at low-risk of adverse outcomes and might be effectively managed as outpatients. While ED HF risk prediction tools guide admission or discharge decisions, they have not been compared, are not routinely used in EDs, and do not include patient-reported outcomes that may be associated with prognosis. Objective: To assess the feasibility of collecting variables for three published ED-based HF risk prediction tools (table) and the capacity to collect participant-reported outcomes. Methods: We screened a convenience sample of patients age ≥20 years with symptoms of HF (e.g. shortness of breath, edema) receiving care in a US ED. We collected information from medical records, and administered a questionnaire to collect patient-reported outcomes and a 3-minute walking test. We developed a safety protocol to identify participants ineligible for the walking test. Results: We screened 66 patients and consented 31 (47%) participants. The average age was 61 years, 6 (19.4%) were female and 28 (90.3%) were admitted. We completed all the questionnaires with an average time of 31 minutes. For the walking test, 15 were ineligible per the safety protocol, 6 completed the test, and 10 did not consent. For the three HF tools, we collected an average of 93.4% of the variables needed per participant (range across tools 91.4%-97.7%; Table). The main missing variables were BMI on ED arrival (n=23) and troponin (due to hemolyzed values, n=5). Conclusion: We obtained complete data for the participant questionnaires, yet there were missing values for variables needed for the HF tools. The Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade tool had the most complete data. If a research or clinical study plans to use these tools, the study protocol should include BMI and troponin measurements and consider alternative strategies to collect data, such as by self-report.

External Validation and Refinement of Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade Risk Model in Patients With Heart Failure in the Emergency Department

BackgroundEmergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) assesses the risk of death within 7 days of emergency department (ED) presentation for patients with acute heart failure (AHF). We aimed to externally validate and refine the EHMRG model in patients who presented to the ED with AHF. MethodsWe performed a cohort study using administrative data for all ambulance-transported patients from Alberta (2012-2016) presenting to the ED with a primary diagnosis of AHF. ResultsAmong 6708 patients with AHF, the 7-day mortality was 0.0%, 0.8%, 1.6%, 4.0%, 4.2%, and 12.0% across EHMRG risk categories (1-4, 5A and 5B). The EHMRG score had a c-index of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.76) for 7-day mortality and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for 30-day mortality, but lower c-statistics for other outcomes (0.61-0.67). The inclusion of natriuretic peptides to the EHMRG model improved prediction (Net Reclassification Improvement, 0.268; 95% CI, 0.173-0.363; P < 0.01) for 7-day mortality, as did the addition of the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (Net Reclassification Improvement, 0.111; 95% CI, 0.005-0.218; P = 0.04). ConclusionThe EHMRG model exhibited moderate discriminative ability in a large population-based cohort of patients with AHF in the ED. Revision of the EHMRG score through factor inclusion and exclusion could improve the model’s performance.

Abstract 133: Early Impact of Systematizing the Evaluation of Patients with Heart Failure Presenting to the Emergency Department

Introduction: It can be difficult in patients with heart failure (HF) who present to the emergency department (ED) with shortness of breath to decide who warrants admission and who can be safely sent home. At our institution, there was great variability across ED physicians’ admission rates (66%-100%). To address this, we developed an evidence-based protocol to support more consistent HF evaluation in the ED and implemented the program with the help of a multi-disciplinary team. Methods: HF patients presenting to the ED with shortness of breath were eligible for the CODE HF protocol, which was hinged on the use of the prospectively-validated Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) score. Patients with a &lt;1% 7-day mortality were eligible for discharge, if their symptoms improved and the patient and ED physician were comfortable with discharge. The protocol also included HF education in the ED and follow-up. Outcomes included a comparison of patients on and off the CODE HF pathway (1/18-10/18) for ED length of stay, ED discharge, time to outpatient visits among those discharged from the ED and short-stay (potentially unnecessary) hospitalizations. Pearson Chi-square and one-way ANOVA tests were used for comparison. Given our experience that non-patient factors were responsible for not using the protocol, patient-level adjustment was not done. Results: A total of 112 patients out of 933 HF patients seen in the ED between 1/18 and 10/18 were managed through the CODE HF protocol. The EHMRG was calculated in 82 (73%) patients (45 high risk, 37 low risk). When used, the CODE HF protocol was associated with 46% greater rates of ED discharges (14.1% vs 25.9%), a 7-day faster cardiology follow-up visit (25 vs 16 days) and 36% fewer hospital short-stays of &lt;48 hours (12.6% vs 8%) among admitted patients (p&lt;0.05 for all). Importantly, the protocol reduced time in the ED by 42 minutes (288 vs 246 minutes). Conclusions: In this quality improvement pilot study, early implementation of the CODE HF protocol showed more effective care being delivered. A more robust study with wider implementation and evaluation of its impact on return visits is underway.

Abstract 35: Developing a Systematic Process for Evaluating Heart Failure (HF) Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department: The Code HF Project

Introduction: It can be difficult in patients with heart failure (HF) who present to the emergency department (ED) with shortness of breath to decide who warrants admission and who can be safely sent home. At our institution, there was great variability across different ED physician’s admission rates (66%-100%). To address this, we developed an evidence-based protocol to support more consistent evaluation and implemented the program with the help of a multi-disciplinary team. Here, we discuss the process of development. Methods: An ED physician led a team of cardiologists, nurses, educators, administrators and researchers to identify key considerations in the ED management of patients with HF and to create a feasible protocol for implementation (Figure). A central feature of this approach is the use of a prospectively validated Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG) score and agreement that patients with a &lt;1% 7-day mortality would be eligible for discharge if their symptoms rapidly improved and close follow up could be arranged. Iterative improvements to the protocol and its execution with the electronic medical record (EMR) were made to improve our primary process measure, use in all eligible patients. Results: Despite education at provider meetings and integration within the EMR, over the first year of implementation across all four EDs within the network, only 12% of eligible patients were managed by Code HF, with marked variability across EDs (0-20% of eligible patients) and physicians (0-80%). Further opportunities to improve adoption were elicited from providers and included different presentations within the EMR, creation of a standing order, integration of the predicted risk into ED notes and regular feedback of use and outcomes associated with the Code HF program. Conclusion: Implementing an evidence-based, sustainable strategy for systematically evaluating and managing patients with HF presenting to the ED has been challenging, but offers the opportunity to deliver more efficient, patient-centered care. Iterative improvements informed by providers and tailored to our local context is leading to increased protocol use among ED physicians.

Design and rationale for the Acute Congestive Heart Failure Urgent Care Evaluation: The ACUTE Study

Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading reasons for emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalization. However, externally validated risk algorithms for acute prognostication of heart failure patients are not available. Thus, many low-risk patients are hospitalized and some high-risk patients are discharged home, which, in some cases, may lead to death. The first objective of the ACUTE study is to perform a prospective validation of the Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade (EHMRG), which is a risk score derived to predict 7-day mortality in the ED setting. The second objective is to independently validate the 30-day model extension of the risk score (EHMRG30-ST) in the same cohort. Patients with HF presenting to the ED will be recruited with a waiver of informed consent as a minimal risk study. The ED physician will calculate the EHMRG 7-day risk score, but treatment decisions will not be influenced by the predictive models. Follow-up will be obtained using probabilistic linkage with the Registered Persons Database of vital statistics, whereby deaths will be ascertained. We will examine mortality rates according to EHMRG and EHMRG30-ST algorithms. We will also compare physician-judged risk estimates, based on clinical judgment alone, with the EHMRG score. The ACUTE study will determine if a retrospectively derived algorithm for simultaneous estimation of 7-day and 30-day mortality risk can accurately identify low- and high-risk patients with acute HF and improve upon physician-judged risk estimation.

Impact of Nitrate Use on Survival in Acute Heart Failure: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BackgroundThere is limited evidence that the use of nitrates in acute decompensated heart failure early after presentation to a hospital can improve clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine whether early nitrate exposure is associated with improved survival in a large retrospective cohort study.Methods and ResultsWe examined 11 078 acute decompensated heart failure patients who presented to emergency departments in Ontario, Canada, between 2004 and 2007, in the Enhanced Feedback For Effective Cardiac Treatment and the Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade studies. In propensity‐matched analyses, we examined the effect of nitrate administration in the acute emergency department setting for its impact on death at 7, 30, and 365 days. In propensity‐matched analyses, we found no difference in survival between those who received nitrates in the emergency department and the non‐nitrate comparator group. Hazard ratios for mortality were 0.76 (95% CI; 0.51, 1.12) over 7 days, 0.97 (95% CI; 0.77, 1.21) over 30 days, and 0.91 (95% CI; 0.82, 1.02) over 1 year of follow‐up. There was no significant difference in survival or hospital length of stay between nitrate and non‐nitrate controls in extended follow‐up. There was also no significant effect of nitrates in subgroups stratified by presence of chest pain, troponin elevation, chronic nitrate use, and known coronary artery disease.ConclusionsIn acute decompensated heart failure, use of nitrates acutely in the emergency department setting was not associated with improvement in short‐term or near‐term survival. Our study does not support generalized use of nitrates when the primary goal of therapy is to reduce mortality.

Ischemic electrocardiographic abnormalities and prognosis in decompensated heart failure.

Identification of coronary ischemia may enable targeted diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for acute heart failure. We determined the risk of 30-day mortality associated with ischemic ECG abnormalities in patients with acute heart failure. Among 8772 patients (53.4% women, median 78 years [Q1, Q3: 68,84]) presenting with acute heart failure to 86 hospital emergency departments in Ontario, Canada, Q-waves, T-wave inversion, or ST-depression were present in 51.8% of subjects. However, presence of ST-depression was the only finding associated with 30-day mortality with adjusted odds ratio 1.24 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.50). Using continuous net reclassification improvement, addition of ST-depression to the Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade model reclassified 16.9% of patients overall, and 29.3% of those with a history of ischemic heart disease (both P<0.001). By adding ST-depression to the model, the Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade was extended to predict 30-day death with high discrimination (c-statistic 0.801), with 0.57% mortality rate in the lowest risk decile. Adjusted odds ratios for 30-day mortality were 2.81 (95% CI, 1.48-5.31; P=0.002) in quintile 2, 7.41 (95% CI, 4.13-13.30; P<0.001) in quintile 3, and 14.47 (95% CI, 8.20-25.54; P<0.001) in quintile 4 compared with the lowest risk quintile. When the highest risk quintile was subdivided into 2 equally sized risk strata (deciles 9 and 10), the adjusted odds ratios for 30-day mortality were 27.20 (95% CI, 15.33-48.27; P<0.001) in decile 9 and 58.96 (95% CI, 33.54-103.65; P<0.001) in highest risk decile 10. Presence of ST-depression on the ECG reclassified risk of 30-day mortality in patients with acute heart failure, identifying both high- and low-risk subsets.

DOES FRAILTY PREDICT OUTCOMES AMONGST ELDERLY HEART FAILURE PATIENTS AFTER HOSPITAL SEPARATION?

Frailty, often described as a syndrome associated with the loss of cognitive and physical reserves, is common in heart failure (HF) patients. However, it is unknown if clinical features constituting frailty are independent predictors of mortality and morbidity in HF patients after adjustment for known clinical and comorbid factors associated with adverse outcome. To determine if frailty indicators are predictive of death or hospital readmission among elderly HF patients in a population-based setting. We studied a retrospective cohort of community-dwelling patients aged >75 years, who were discharged after hospitalization or emergency department visit for heart failure in Ontario, Canada, in the Enhanced Feedback For Effective Cardiac Treatment and Emergency Heart failure Mortality Risk Grade databases (2004 to 2007). Frailty indicators were defined by the presence of dementia, falls, incontinence, immobility, abnormal weight loss, care provider dependency, or a composite of all of these variables, according to medical record review and/or diagnoses in historical hospital discharge abstracts. Cox regression was used to determine the independent effect of frailty on the risk of death within 1 year after adjusting for other risk factors. The analyses were then repeated with 1-year readmission as the outcome. In a study cohort of 9964 patients presenting with HF (median 83 years [IQR: 80-88], 43% men), at least one indicator of frailty was present in 2769 (27.8%) of patients. In descending order of frequency, the most common frailty indicators were: dementia (14.5%), falls (11.0%), care provider dependency (6.8%), immobility (2.9%), abnormal weight loss (1.4%), and incontinence (0.8%). After adjustment for age, sex, vital signs, laboratory variables, and comorbidities, presence of any frailty indicator was associated with the risk of death: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.18 (95%CI; 1.06-1.32, p=0.003). Risk of readmission was also increased in the presence of any frailty indicator: adjusted HR 1.29 (95%CI; 1.18-1.41, p<.001). When follow-up was restricted to 30-days, death (HR 0.96; 95%CI; 0.78-1.19) and readmission (HR 1.16; 95%CI; 0.99-1.35) were not significantly associated with any frailty indicator. Over the course of 1-year follow-up, all individual frailty indicator components (excluding immobility) were significantly associated with either death or readmission after multivariable adjustment (Table). Only presence of dementia was associated with a 30-day outcome (HR 1.64, 95%CI; 1.39-1.94, p<.001). Frailty indicators derived from clinical and administrative data sources are associated with death and readmission risk at one-year, but not 30-day follow-up.