↓ Skip to main content

Short-term outcomes of heart failure patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction after acute decompensation according to the final destination after emergency department care

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Research in Cardiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Short-term outcomes of heart failure patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction after acute decompensation according to the final destination after emergency department care
Published in
Clinical Research in Cardiology, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00392-018-1237-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Òscar Miró, V.íctor Gil, Francisco Javier Martín-Sánchez, Javier Jacob, Pablo Herrero, Aitor Alquézar, Lluís Llauger, Sira Aguiló, Gemma Martínez, José Ríos, Alberto Domínguez-Rodríguez, Veli-Pekka Harjola, Christian Müller, John Parissis, W. Frank Peacock, Pere Llorens, The Research Group on Acute Heart Failure of the Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (ICA-SEMES Research Group) Researchers

Abstract

To compare short-term outcomes after an episode of acute heart failure (AHF) in patients with reduced and preserved ejection fractions (HFrEF, < 40%; and HFpEF, > 49%; respectively) according to their destinations after emergency department (ED) care. This secondary analysis of the EAHFE Registry (consecutive AHF patients diagnosed in 41 Spanish EDs) investigated 30-day all-cause mortality, in-hospital all-cause mortality, prolonged hospitalisation (> 7 days), and 30-day post-discharge ED revisit due to AHF, all-cause death, and combined endpoint (ED revisit/death) in 5829 patients with echocardiographically documented HFrEF and HfpEF (HFrEF/HFpEF: 1,442/4,387). Adjusted ratios were calculated for patients admitted to internal medicine (IM), short stay unit (SSU), and discharged from the ED without hospitalisation (DEDWH) and compared with those admitted to cardiology. For HFrEF, the only significant differences were lower in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.08-0.81; p = 0.021) and prolonged hospitalisation (OR = 0.07; 95% CI 0.04-0.13; p < 0.001) related to SSU admission. For HFpEF, IM admission had a higher post-discharge 30-day mortality (HR = 1.85; 95% CI 1.05-3.25; p = 0.033) and combined endpoint (HR = 1.24; 95% CI 1.01-1.64; p = 0.044); SSU admission had a lower in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.23-0.80; p = 0.008) and prolonged hospitalisation (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.13-0.23; p < 0.001) but a higher post-discharge 30-day combined endpoint (HR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.01-1.64; p = 0.041); and DEDDWH had a lower 30-day mortality (HR = 0.46; 95% CI 0.28-0.75; p = 0.002) but higher post-discharge ED revisit (HR = 1.62; 95% CI 1.31-2.00; p < 0.001). While HFrEF patients have similar short-term outcomes irrespective of the destination after ED care for an AHF episode, HFpEF patients present worse short-term outcomes when managed by non-cardiology departments, despite adjustment for different clinical patient profiles. Reasons for this heterogeneous specialty-related performance should be investigated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 25%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Mathematics 1 2%
Materials Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2018.
All research outputs
#13,509,734
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Research in Cardiology
#453
of 829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,160
of 329,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Research in Cardiology
#11
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 829 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.8. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.