Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

Abstract

Compare outcomes in patients with suspected heart failure (HF) and raised natriuretic peptides who are reviewed in a specialist HF clinic in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines (compliant group) versus patients who are not reviewed in the clinic (non-compliant group). Retrospective observational study. Single large UK district general hospital. 567 consecutive patients in primary care with raised N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) levels (>400 pg/mL) from February to September 2014. 161 (28%) patients were referred to the specialist HF clinic and 406 (72%) were not. Outcomes were compared between the two groups. All-cause and cardiovascular (CV) hospitalisations and all-cause mortality. The compliant group were slightly younger than the non-compliant group (78±9 vs 80±9; p=0.019) but had much higher NT-pro-BNP (3108±4526 vs 2271±3637 pg/mL; p<0.0001). Despite this, over a mean follow-up period of 9±2 months, rates of all-cause hospitalisation (24% vs 44%; p<0.0001) and CV hospitalisation (3% vs 15%, p<0.0001) were significantly lower in the compliant group versus the non-compliant group, respectively. There was no significant difference in mortality rates (6% compliant group vs 8% non-compliant group; p=0.487). Hospitalisation rates in patients with suspected HF and raised NT-pro-BNP were extremely high over a relatively short follow-up period. Patients reviewed in a specialist HF clinic had much higher NT-pro-BNP levels, suggesting they were at higher risk of adverse outcomes, yet also had significantly lower rates of all-cause and CV hospitalisation. Our findings support implementation of the relevant NICE guidelines for patients with suspected HF.