Patient care pathways in acute heart failure and their impact on in-hospital mortality, a French national prospective survey.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to describe the care pathway of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) and investigate whether a management involving a cardiology department had an impact on in-hospital mortality. METHODS: Between June 2014 and October 2018, we included patients hospitalized for AHF in 24 French hospitals. Characteristics of the episode, patient's care pathway and outcomes were recorded on a specific assessment tool. The primary outcome was the association between patient care pathway and in-hospital mortality. The independent association between admission to a cardiology ward and in-hospital mortality was assessed through a multivariate regression model and propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 3677 patients, mean age of 78, were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 8% (n = 287) and was associated on multivariate regression with advanced age, presence of sepsis, of cardiogenic shock, high New York Heart Association (NYHA) score and increased plasma creatinine level on admission. High blood pressure and admission to a cardiology department appeared as protective factors. After propensity score matching, hospitalization in a cardiology department remained a protective factor of in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.61 [0.44-0.84], p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: A hospital course of care involving a cardiology department was associated with an increase in hospital survival in AHF patients. These finding may highlight the importance of collaboration between cardiologists and other in-hospitals specialties, such as emergency physicians, in order to find the best in-hospital pathway for patients with AHF.Clinical Trial NCT03903198.

Effect of Systematic Physician Cross-checking on Reducing Adverse Events in the Emergency Department: The CHARMED Cluster Randomized Trial.

Importance: Emergency departments (ED) are environments that are at high risk for medical errors. Previous studies suggested that the proportion of medical errors may decrease when more than 1 physician is involved. Objective: To reduce the proportion of medical errors by implementing systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized crossover trial includes a random sample of 14 adult patients (age ≥18 years) per day during two 10-day period in 6 EDs (n = 1680 patients) in France. Interventions: Systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians, 3 times a day, which included a brief presentation of one physician's case to another, followed by the second physician's feedback to the first. Main Outcomes and Measures: Medical error in the ED, defined as an adverse event (either a near miss or a serious adverse event). The primary end point was identified using a 2-level error detection surveillance system, blinded to the strategy allocation. Results: Among the 1680 included patients (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [21.7] years), 144 (8.6%) had an adverse event. There were 54 adverse events among 840 patients (6.4%) in the cross-check group compared with 90 adverse events among 840 patients (10.7%) in the standard care group (relative risk reduction [RRR], 40% [95% CI, 12% to 59%]; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 4.3%; number needed to treat [NNT], 24). There was also a significant reduction rate of near misses (RRR, 47% [95% CI, 15% to 67%]; ARR, 2.7%; NNT, 37) but not of the rate of preventable serious adverse events (RRR, 29% [95% CI, -18% to 57%]; ARR, 1.2%; NNT, 83). Conclusions and Relevance: The implementation of systematic cross-checking between emergency physicians was associated with a significant reduction in adverse events, mainly driven by a reduction in near misses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02356926.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone consultations for fever or gastroenteritis using a formalised procedure in general practice: study protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Telephone consultations in general practice are on the increase. However, data on their efficiency in terms of out-of-hours general practitioner (GP) workload, visits to hospital emergency departments (ED), cost, patient safety and satisfaction are relatively scant. The aim of this trial is to assess the effectiveness of telephone consultations provided by French emergency call centres in patients presenting with isolated fever or symptoms of gastroenteritis, mainly encountered diseases. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, pragmatic, cluster randomised clinical trial of an estimated 2880 patients making an out-of-hours call to one of six French emergency call centres for assistance with either fever or symptoms of gastroenteritis without seriousness criteria. Each call is handled by a call centre physician. Out-of-hours is 8 p.m. to 7.59 a.m. on weekdays, 1 p.m. to 7.59 a.m. on Saturdays and round-the-clock on Sundays and school holidays. Patients will be enrolled over 1 year. In the intervention arm, a telephone consultation based on a protocol, the formal Telephone Medical Advice (fTMA), is offered to each patient calling. This protocol aims to overcome a physical consultation during out-of-hours periods. It offers reassurance and explanations, advice on therapeutic management which may include, in addition to hygiene and diet measures, a telephone prescription of antipyretic, analgesic, rehydration medication or others, and recommendations on surveillance of the patient and any action to be taken. The patient is invited to call again if the condition worsens or new symptoms develop and to make an appointment with their family GP during office hours. In the control arm, the call centre physician handles calls as usual. This physician can carry out a telephone consultation with or without a telephone prescription, dispatch an on-duty GP, the fire brigade or an ambulance to the patient, or refer the patient to an on-duty physician or to the ED. Each patient will receive a follow-up call on day 15. The primary endpoint is the frequency of out-of-hours, face-to-face GP consultations or visits to the ED during the 15 days following the index call. The secondary endpoints measured on day 15 are the number of stays in intensive care, the number of hospital admissions, the number of interventions by the fire brigade, emergency medical and ambulance services, the number and length of prescribed sick-leave episodes, all-cause mortality, morbidity, clinical outcome, patient compliance, patient satisfaction, the number of renewed calls to the call centre, the number of patients receiving multiple face-to-face GP consultations and costs incurred. DISCUSSION: This trial will assess the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of a formalised response to calls for assistance with fever or symptoms of gastroenteritis without seriousness criteria. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02286245 , registered on 9 September 2014.