CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Congestive Heart Failure

Abstract

Recommended Article

Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial Machine learning based on biomarker profiles identifies distinct subgroups of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction Modifiable lifestyle factors and heart failure: A Mendelian randomization study How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2019 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Risk Assessment, Management, and Clinical Trajectory of Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Guideline‐Directed Medical Therapy for Patients With Heart Failure With Midrange Ejection Fraction: A Patient‐Pooled Analysis From the KorHF and KorAHF Registries The Role of the Pericardium in Heart Failure: Implications for Pathophysiology and Treatment

Recommandation StatementVolume 8, Issue 1, January 2020

JOURNAL:JACC Heart Fail. Article Link

The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program Nationwide Perspectives and Recommendations: A JACC: Heart Failure Position Paper

MA Psotka, GC Fonarow, LA Allen et al. Keywords: 30-day readmission; heart failure; HRRP; Medicare

ABSTRACT


The mandatory federal pay-for-performance Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) was created to decrease 30-day hospital readmissions by instituting accountability and stimulating quality care and coordination, particularly during care transitions. The HRRP has changed the landscape of hospital readmissions and reimbursement within the United States by imposing substantial Medicare payment penalties on hospitals with higher-than-expected readmission rates. However, the HRRP has been controversial since its inception, particularly in the field of heart failure. Proponents argue that it has reduced national readmission rates, in part by raising awareness and investment in mechanisms to better assist patients during discharge and transitions; opponents contend that it unfairly penalizes hospitals for issues beyond their control, has unintended negative consequences due to incentivizing readmission over survival, that it encourages “gaming” the system, was not tested before implementation, and that it does not specify how hospitals can improve their performance. This paper incorporates the diverse, nuanced, and sometimes divergent interpretations presented during a multifaceted expert clinician discussion regarding the HRRP and heart failure; in cases in which consensus opinions were achieved, they are presented, including regarding potential new iterations of the HRRP for the future. Potential improvements include more comprehensive incorporation of outcomes into the HRRP measure and better risk adjustment to improve equality and fairness.