Search

Aims: Prognostic models for hospitalized heart failure (HHF) were developed predominantly for patients of European origin in the United States of America; it is unclear whether they perform similarly in other health care systems or for different ethnicities. We sought to validate published prediction models for HHF in the United Kingdom (UK) and Japan.Methods and Results: Patients in the UK (n =894) and Japan (n =3158) were prospectively enrolled and were similar in terms of sex (∼60% men) and median age (∼77 years). Models predicted that British patients would have a higher mortality than Japanese, which was indeed true both for in-hospital (4.8% vs. 2.5%) and 180-day (20.7% vs. 9.5%) mortality. The model c-statistics for the published/derivation (range 0.70-0.76) and Japanese (range 0.75-0.77) cohorts were similar and higher than for the UK (0.62-0.75) but models consistently overestimated mortality in Japan. For in-hospital mortality, the OPTIMIZE-HF model performed best, providing similar discrimination in published/derivation, UK and Japanese cohorts [c-indices: 0.75 (0.74-0.77); 0.75 (0.68-0.81); and 0.77 (0.70-0.83), respectively], and least overestimated mortality in Japan. For 180-day mortality, the c-statistics for the ASCEND-HF model were similar in published/derivation (0.70) and UK [0.69 (0.64-0.74)] cohorts but higher in Japan [0.75 (0.71-0.79)]; calibration was good in the UK but again overestimated mortality in Japan.Conclusion: Calibration of published prediction models appears moderately accurate and unbiased when applied to British patients but consistently overestimates mortality in Japan. Identifying the reason why patients in Japan have a better than predicted prognosis is of great interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In previous systematic reviews (predominantly of randomized controlled trials), pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been shown to reduce hospital admissions for acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD). However, findings have been less consistent for cohort studies. The goal of this study was to compare rates of hospitalized and general practice (GP)-treated AECOPD prior to and following PR.Methods: Using anonymized data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics, hospital admissions and GP visits for AECOPD were compared 1 year prior to and 1 year following PR in patients referred for PR. Exacerbation rates were also compared between individuals eligible and referred for PR vs those eligible and not referred.Results: A total of 69,089 (64%) of the patients with COPD in the cohort were eligible for PR. Of these, only 6,436 (9.3%) were recorded as having been referred for rehabilitation. A total of 62,019 (89.8%) were not referred, and 634 (0.98%) declined referral. When combining GP and hospital exacerbations, patients who were eligible and referred for PR had a slightly higher but not statistically significant exacerbation rate (2.83 exacerbations/patient-year; 95% CI, 2.66-3.00) than those who were eligible but not referred (2.17 exacerbations/patient-year; 95% CI, 2.11-2.24).Conclusions: This study found that < 10% of patients who were eligible for PR were actually referred. Patients who were eligible and referred for (but not necessarily completed) PR did not have fewer GP visits and hospitalizations for AECOPD in the year following PR compared with those not referred or compared with the year prior to PR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the accuracy of Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores in predicting mortality at 6 months for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to investigate how it might be improved.Methods: Data were obtained on 481 849 patients with acute coronary syndrome admitted to UK hospitals between January 2003 and June 2013 from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) database. We compared risk of death between patients with COPD and those without COPD at 6 months, adjusting for predicted risk of death. We then assessed whether several modifications improved the accuracy of the GRACE score for people with COPD.Results: The risk of death after adjusting for GRACE score predicted that risk of death was higher for patients with COPD than that for other patients (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.33). Adding smoking into the GRACE score model did not improve accuracy for patients with COPD. Either adding COPD into the model (relative risk (RR) 1.00, 0.94 to 1.02) or multiplying the GRACE score by 1.3 resulted in better performance (RR 0.99, 0.96 to 1.01).Conclusions: GRACE scores underestimate risk of death for people with COPD. A more accurate prediction of risk of death can be obtained by adding COPD into the GRACE score equation, or by multiplying the GRACE score predicted risk of death by 1.3 for people with COPD. This means that one third of patients with COPD currently classified as low risk should be classified as moderate risk, and could be considered for more aggressive early treatment after non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risks for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) other than myocardial infarction and stroke in the general COPD population are not well quantified. We used a matched cohort study design and Cox regression to estimate relative risks for 12 separate CVDs in a large population-based cohort of patients with COPD over a 12-year period. Associations between COPD and individual CVDs were heterogeneous, with the highest relative risks observed for heart failure and diseases of the arterial circulation (in excess of 2.5 for those aged 64-75 years). Relative risks declined with increasing age but for most CVD outcomes remained unchanged over the study period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]