BackgroundHeart failure (HF) is the commonest cause of hospitalization in older adults. Compared to routine hospitalization (RH), hospital at home (HaH)—substitutive hospital-level care in the patient’s home—improves outcomes and reduces costs in patients with general medical conditions. The efficacy of HaH in HF is unknown.Methods and ResultsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL, for publications from January 1990 to October 2014. We included prospective studies comparing substitutive models of hospitalization to RH in HF. At least 2 reviewers independently selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed quality. We meta-analyzed results from 3 RCTs (n = 203) and narratively synthesized results from 3 observational studies (n = 329). Study quality was modest. In RCTs, HaH increased time to first readmission (mean difference (MD) 14.13 days [95% CI 10.36 to 17.91]), and improved health-related quality of life (HrQOL) at both, 6 months (standardized MD (SMD) -0.31 [-0.45 to -0.18]) and 12 months (SMD -0.17 [-0.31 to -0.02]). In RCTs, HaH demonstrated a trend to decreased readmissions (risk ratio (RR) 0.68 [0.42 to 1.09]), and had no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.94 [0.67 to 1.32]). HaH decreased costs of index hospitalization in all RCTs. HaH reduced readmissions and emergency department visits per patient in all 3 observational studies.ConclusionsIn the context of a limited number of modest-quality studies, HaH appears to increase time to readmission, reduce index costs, and improve HrQOL among patients requiring hospital-level care for HF. Larger RCTs are necessary to assess the effect of HaH on readmissions, mortality, and long-term costs.

The role of electrocardiography (ECG) in prognosticating pulmonary embolism (PE) is increasingly recognized. ECG is quickly interpretable, noninvasive, inexpensive, and available in remote areas.We hypothesized that ECG can provide useful information about PE prognostication. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, abstracts, conference proceedings, and reference lists through February 2017. Eligible studies used ECG to prognosticate for the main outcomes of death and clinical deterioration or escalation of therapy. Two authors independently selected studies; disagreement was resolved by consensus. Ad hoc piloted forms were used to extract data and assess risk of bias. We used a random-effects model to pool relevant data in meta-analysis with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs); all other data were synthesized qualitatively. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 value. We included 39 studies (9198 patients) in the systematic review. There was agreement in study selection (κ:0.91, 95% CI: 0.86-0.96). Most studies were retrospective; some did not appropriately control for confounders. ECG signs that were good predictors of a negative outcome included S1Q3T3 (OR:3.38, 95% CI: 2.46-4.66, P < 0.001), complete right bundle branch block (OR: 3.90, 95% CI: 2.46-6.20, P < 0.001), T-wave inversion (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.19-2.21, P = 0.002), right axis deviation (OR: 3.24, 95% CI: 1.86-5.64, P < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (OR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.45-2.67, P < 0.001) for in-hospital mortality. Several ischemic patterns also were significantly predictive.Our conclusion is that ECG is potentially valuable in prognostication of acute PE.

No abstract

No abstract