OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of a multidisciplinary team HF (MDT-HF) clinic on the use of guideline-directed medical therapy and patients' clinical outcomes at 1 year.
METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a single cardiac centre in Malaysia. Patients with HFrEF who were enrolled in the MDT-HF clinic between November 2017 and June 2020 were compared with a matched control group who received the standard of care. Data were retrieved from the hospital electronic system and were analyzed using statistical software.
RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were included in each group. Patients enrolled in the MDT-HF clinic had higher usage of renin-angiotensin system blockers (54 [100%] vs 47 [87%], p < 0.001) and higher attainment of the target dose for these agents (35 [65%] vs 5 [9%], p < 0.001). At 1 year, the mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly greater in the MDT-HF group (35.7% [standard deviation 12.3%] vs 26.2% [standard deviation 8.7%], p < 0.001), and care in the MDT-HF clinic was significantly associated with better functional class, with a lower proportion of patients categorized as having New York Heart Association class III HF at 1 year (1 [2%] vs 14 [26%], p = 0.001). Patients in the MDT-HF group also had a significantly lower rate of readmission for HF (4 [7%] vs 32 [59%], p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received care in the MDT-HF clinic had better use of guideline-directed medical therapy, greater improvement in LVEF, and a lower rate of readmission for HF at 1 year relative to patients who received the standard of care.
Methods: This study was a prospective cohort design with a historical comparison group. It was conducted to assess the difference in 30-day readmissions and mortality and to assess compliance rate with HF guideline between the historical pre-intervention audit 1 cohort and prospective post-intervention audit 2 cohorts. Audit 1 cohort were recruited from January to February 2019, whereas, audit 2 cohort which received the bundled intervention program were recruited from July to December 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between cohorts using 30-day readmissions and mortality.
Results: A total of 50 and 164 patients were included in audit 1 and audit 2 cohort, respectively. Patients in the audit 2 cohort were younger [63.0 ± 14.5 in audit 1 vs 56.5 ± 12.7 in audit 2, p = 0.003] and majority were male [50.0% in audit 1 vs 72.0% in audit2, p = 0.004]. Thirty-day readmissions were significantly different [36.0% audit 1 vs. 22.0% audit 2, p = 0.045], but the mortality rates were similar [4.0%% audit 1 vs. 5.5% audit 2, p = 0.677] between two cohorts.
Conclusion: A significant decrease in 30-day readmissions was observed in the post-intervention audit 2 cohort in our setting. Further study in larger population and prolong study follow-up is warranted.