Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Cardiologist follow-up and improved outcomes of heart failure: a French nationwide cohort
Authors' conclusion
Despite having a HF diagnosis, 40% of patients do not see a cardiologist annually, regardless of disease severity. Simple stratification based on hospitalization history and diuretic use effectively predicts outcomes.
Study context
- Population
- All French patients reported as having heart failure (HF) in the previous 5 years and alive on 1 January 202080 years (70–87), 48% female
- Participants
- 655,919 patients
- Exposure
- HF risk strata by prior HF hospitalisation and loop diuretic use; cardiology follow-up vs none
- Outcome
- All-cause mortality (ACM)
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Methodological detailsadministrative data
- Administrative data
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Relative mortality risk (fold)
1.61
P < 0.0001
NoHFH/LD+
Relative mortality risk (fold)
1.83
P < 0.0001
HF hospitalization (HFH) > 1y
Relative mortality risk (fold)
2.32
P < 0.0001
HFH ≤ 1y
- Overall 1-year all-cause mortality (ACM) risk
- 15.9%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | HFH ≤ 1y | HFH > 1y | NoHFH/LD+ | NoHFH/LD- |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Additional cardiology visits: NNC | ||||
| NNC | 20 | — not stated in the abstract | — not stated in the abstract | 55 |
| Optimal annual follow-up (minimise deaths without increasing total consultations) | ||||
| Annual visits | 4 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 1 |
— not stated in the abstract
Cardiology follow-up in 2020 · first year (2020)
- Consultation rates similar across groups; patients lacking an annual visit
- 40%
1-year ACM in 2020 with a single cardiology visit in 2019 vs no consultation
- Absolute reduction in 1-year ACM, across all groups
- 6%-9%
- Number needed to consult (NNC) to prevent one modelled death
- 11-16
Additional cardiology visits: NNC
- Greater benefit with increasing HF severity
Original publication
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →