Journal of Cardiac Failure
Volume 16, Issue 5 , Pages 411-418, May 2010

Evidence-Based Heart Failure Performance Measures and Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review

  • Jared Lane K. Maeda, MPH, PhD(C)

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Jared Lane K. Maeda, Division of Health Policy & Administration, University of Illinois at Chicago, School of Public Health, 1603 W. Taylor Street (M/C 923), Chicago, IL 60612-4394. Tel: 617-877-4561.

Division of Health Policy & Administration, University of Illinois at Chicago, School of Public Health, Chicago, IL

Received 7 December 2009; received in revised form 19 January 2010; accepted 27 January 2010. published online 04 March 2010.

Abstract 

Background

Evidence-based performance measures for heart failure are increasingly being used to stimulate quality improvement efforts.

Methods and Results

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Review, and a citation review. Research studies that assessed the association between the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) heart failure performance measures from the inpatient setting and patient outcomes were examined. Studies were restricted to those conducted within the United States from 2001 until the present and included at least 1 of the ACC/AHA performance measures for chronic heart failure and a clinical outcome as an endpoint. Eleven original studies and 1 literature review met the study inclusion criteria. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and β-blocker use at discharge had the strongest association with improved patient outcomes, whereas discharge instructions had a weaker but positive effect.

Conclusions

The findings from this systematic review suggest that an increase in compliance with the heart failure performance measures leads to a consistent positive impact on patient outcomes although the strength, magnitude, and significance of this effect is variable across the individual performance indicators. Further longitudinal studies and additional measure sets may yield deeper insights into the causal relationship between heart failure processes of care and clinical outcomes.

Key Words: Process measures, mortality, readmissions

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported in part by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) R36 HS17944 grant.

PII: S1071-9164(10)00045-X

doi:10.1016/j.cardfail.2010.01.005

Journal of Cardiac Failure
Volume 16, Issue 5 , Pages 411-418, May 2010