Search

Background The purpose of this study was to clarify the current status and issues of community collaboration in heart failure (HF) using a nationwide questionnaire survey.Methods and Results:We conducted a survey among hospital cardiologists and general practitioners (GPs) using a web-based questionnaire developed with the Delphi method, to assess the quality of community collaboration in HF. We received responses from 46 of the 47 prefectures in Japan, including from 281 hospital cardiologists and 145 GPs. The survey included the following characteristics and issues regarding community collaboration. (1) Hospital cardiologists prioritized medical intervention for preventing HF hospitalization and death whereas GPs prioritized supporting the daily living of patients and their families. (2) Hospital cardiologists have not provided information that meets the needs of GPs, and few regions have a community-based system that allows for the sharing of information about patients with HF. (3) In the transition to home care, there are few opportunities for direct communication between hospitals and community staff, and consultation systems are not well developed. Conclusions The current study clarified the real-world status and issues of community collaboration for HF in Japan, especially the differences in priorities for HF management between hospital cardiologists and GPs. Our data will contribute to the future direction and promotion of community collaboration in HF management.

This study examined quality indicators (QIs) for heart failure (HF) in patients' referral documents (PRDs).We conducted a nationwide questionnaire survey to identify information that general practitioners (GPs) would like hospital cardiologists (HCs) to include in PRDs and that HCs actually include in PRDs. The percentage of GPs that desired each item included in PRDs was converted into a deviation score, and items with a deviation score of ≥ 50 were defined as QIs. We rated the quality of PRDs provided by HCs based on QI assessment.We received 281 responses from HCs and 145 responses from GPs. The following were identified as QIs: 1) HF cause; 2) B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-BNP concentration; 3) left ventricular ejection fraction or echocardiography; 4) body weight; 5) education of patients and their families on HF; 6) physical function, and 7) functions of daily living. Based on QI assessment, only 21.7% of HCs included all seven items in their PRDs. HCs specializing in HF and institutions with many full-time HCs were independently associated with including the seven items in PRDs.The quality of PRDs for HF varies among physicians and hospitals, and standardization is needed based on QI assessment.

Background: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves health-related quality of life and exercise capacity in patients with heart failure (HF). However, CR efficacy in patients with HF who are elderly, frail, or have HF with preserved ejection fraction remains unclear. We examined whether participation in multidisciplinary outpatient CR is associated with long-term survival and rehospitalization in patients with HF, with subgroup analysis by age, sex, comorbidities, frailty, and HF with preserved ejection fraction. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed in patients hospitalized for acute HF at 15 hospitals in Japan, 2007 to 2016. The primary outcome (composite of all-cause mortality and HF rehospitalization after discharge) and secondary outcomes (all-cause mortality and HF rehospitalization) were analyzed in outpatient CR program participants versus nonparticipants. Results: Of the 3277 patients, 26% (862) participated in outpatient CR. After propensity matching for potential confounders, 1592 patients were included (n=796 pairs), of which 511 had composite outcomes (223 [14%] all-cause deaths and 392 [25%] HF rehospitalizations, median 2.4-year follow-up). Hazard ratios associated with CR participation were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.65–0.92) for composite outcome, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.51–0.87) for all-cause mortality, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.67–0.99) for HF-related rehospitalization. CR participation was also associated with numerically lower rates of composite outcome in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction or frail patients. Conclusions: Outpatient CR participation was associated with substantial prognostic benefit in a large HF cohort regardless of age, sex, comorbidities, frailty, and HF with preserved ejection fraction.

Background The purpose of this study was to clarify the implementation rate of multidisciplinary heart failure (HF) care and cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in Japan, as well as the relationship between implementation rates and characteristics of the facility.Methods and Results:Survey participants were cardiologists who are members of the Japan Heart Failure Society and belonged to 1 of 845 medical institutions that are members of the Japan Heart Failure Society, as of April 2016. A total of 288 institutions (34.1%) returned the questionnaire. The percentages of hospitals implementing multidisciplinary HF care were 78.5% for inpatients and 32.6% for outpatients with HF. Inpatient and outpatient CR for HF had implementation rates of 80.4% and 56.5%, respectively. In addition, very few HF patients (7.3%, 3,741/51,323 patients) received outpatient CR. Both the presence of nurses certified in chronic HF care and registered CR instructors on staff were consistently associated with implementation of multidisciplinary HF care, and Japanese Circulation Society training hospitals, lower number of hospital beds, and presence of registered CR instructors on staff were consistently associated with implementation of CR. Conclusions This first nationwide survey demonstrated that the implementation rates of multidisciplinary care and CR for HF, especially for outpatients, are low in Japan. Skilled healthcare professionals are expected to play important roles in the widespread implementation of this type of HF care in Japan.

Health literacy (HL) is an important concept for patient education and disease management with heart failure (HF). However, research on HL has predominantly focused on functional HL (ability to read and write). The World Health Organization advocates evaluating comprehensive HL, including the ability to access information (communicative HL) and critically evaluate that information (critical HL).We developed an instrument for measuring functional, communicative, and critical levels of HL in patients with HF.We evaluated the reliability and validity of those 3 HL scales in a sample of 191 outpatients with HF (mean [SD] age, 66.9 [13.9] years; 64.9% males). Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, knowledge of HF, a well as motivation to obtain health information were assessed for each patient through a self-administered questionnaire and review of electronic medical records.We constructed scale items to reflect directly the comprehensive World Health Organization definition of HL. We identified 3 interpretable factors by exploratory factor analysis. Internal consistency was marginally acceptable for total HL (Cronbach α = 0.71), functional HL (α = 0.73), communicative HL (α = 0.68), and critical HL (α = 0.69); the interclass correlation coefficients of the functional, communicative, and critical HL subscales were 0.882, 0.898, and 0.882, respectively. Low functional, communicative, and critical HL was characteristic of older patients, those with lower socioeconomic status, patients living alone, those without a high school education, and patients lacking HF knowledge.Our new HL scale was demonstrated to be a reliable, valid instrument for measuring functional, communicative, and critical HL in patients with HF. Exploring a patient's HL level, including the ability to access, understand, and use health information as well as the ability to read and write, may provide better understanding of patients' potential barriers to self-care.