Is hospital admission for heart failure really necessary? The role of the emergency department and observation unit in preventing hospitalization and rehospitalization

Sean P. Collins, Peter S. Pang, Gregg C. Fonarow, Clyde W. Yancy, Robert O. Bonow, Mihai Gheorghiade

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

86 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Approximately 800,000 times a year, an emergency physician admits a patient with symptomatic heart failure (HF). Yet only a minority of emergency department patients with HF are severely ill as a result of pulmonary edema, myocardial ischemia, or cardiogenic shock. The majority of patients are not in need of an acute intervention beyond decongestion, and few patients during hospitalization undergo invasive diagnostic testing or therapeutic procedures that require intense monitoring. Although hospitalization is clearly an inflection point, marking a threshold that independently predicts a worse outcome, the exact impact of hospitalization on post-discharge events has not been well elucidated. Thus, large subsets of patients with HF are hospitalized without a clear need for time-sensitive therapies or procedures. The authors estimate that up to 50% of emergency department patients with HF could be safely discharged after a brief period of observation, thus avoiding unnecessary admissions and minimizing readmissions. Observation unit management may be beneficial for low-risk and intermediate-risk patients with HF as continued treatment, and more precise risk stratification may ensue, avoiding inpatient admission. Whether observation unit management is comparable with or superior to the current approach must be determined in a randomized clinical trial. Critical end points include time to symptom resolution and discharge, post-discharge event rates, and a cost-effective analysis of each management strategy. It is the authors' strong assertion that now is the time for such a trial and that the results will be critically important if we are to effectively influence hospitalizations for HF in the near future.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)121-126
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume61
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 15 2013

Fingerprint

Hospital Emergency Service
Hospitalization
Heart Failure
Observation
Cardiogenic Shock
Pulmonary Edema
Myocardial Ischemia
Inpatients
Emergencies
Therapeutics
Randomized Controlled Trials
Physicians
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • emergency department
  • heart failure
  • hospitalization
  • observation unit

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Is hospital admission for heart failure really necessary? The role of the emergency department and observation unit in preventing hospitalization and rehospitalization. / Collins, Sean P.; Pang, Peter S.; Fonarow, Gregg C.; Yancy, Clyde W.; Bonow, Robert O.; Gheorghiade, Mihai.

In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 61, No. 2, 15.01.2013, p. 121-126.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{7d023496294647509296494e1d444694,
title = "Is hospital admission for heart failure really necessary?: The role of the emergency department and observation unit in preventing hospitalization and rehospitalization",
abstract = "Approximately 800,000 times a year, an emergency physician admits a patient with symptomatic heart failure (HF). Yet only a minority of emergency department patients with HF are severely ill as a result of pulmonary edema, myocardial ischemia, or cardiogenic shock. The majority of patients are not in need of an acute intervention beyond decongestion, and few patients during hospitalization undergo invasive diagnostic testing or therapeutic procedures that require intense monitoring. Although hospitalization is clearly an inflection point, marking a threshold that independently predicts a worse outcome, the exact impact of hospitalization on post-discharge events has not been well elucidated. Thus, large subsets of patients with HF are hospitalized without a clear need for time-sensitive therapies or procedures. The authors estimate that up to 50{\%} of emergency department patients with HF could be safely discharged after a brief period of observation, thus avoiding unnecessary admissions and minimizing readmissions. Observation unit management may be beneficial for low-risk and intermediate-risk patients with HF as continued treatment, and more precise risk stratification may ensue, avoiding inpatient admission. Whether observation unit management is comparable with or superior to the current approach must be determined in a randomized clinical trial. Critical end points include time to symptom resolution and discharge, post-discharge event rates, and a cost-effective analysis of each management strategy. It is the authors' strong assertion that now is the time for such a trial and that the results will be critically important if we are to effectively influence hospitalizations for HF in the near future.",
keywords = "emergency department, heart failure, hospitalization, observation unit",
author = "Collins, {Sean P.} and Pang, {Peter S.} and Fonarow, {Gregg C.} and Yancy, {Clyde W.} and Bonow, {Robert O.} and Mihai Gheorghiade",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.1022",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "121--126",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is hospital admission for heart failure really necessary?

T2 - The role of the emergency department and observation unit in preventing hospitalization and rehospitalization

AU - Collins, Sean P.

AU - Pang, Peter S.

AU - Fonarow, Gregg C.

AU - Yancy, Clyde W.

AU - Bonow, Robert O.

AU - Gheorghiade, Mihai

PY - 2013/1/15

Y1 - 2013/1/15

N2 - Approximately 800,000 times a year, an emergency physician admits a patient with symptomatic heart failure (HF). Yet only a minority of emergency department patients with HF are severely ill as a result of pulmonary edema, myocardial ischemia, or cardiogenic shock. The majority of patients are not in need of an acute intervention beyond decongestion, and few patients during hospitalization undergo invasive diagnostic testing or therapeutic procedures that require intense monitoring. Although hospitalization is clearly an inflection point, marking a threshold that independently predicts a worse outcome, the exact impact of hospitalization on post-discharge events has not been well elucidated. Thus, large subsets of patients with HF are hospitalized without a clear need for time-sensitive therapies or procedures. The authors estimate that up to 50% of emergency department patients with HF could be safely discharged after a brief period of observation, thus avoiding unnecessary admissions and minimizing readmissions. Observation unit management may be beneficial for low-risk and intermediate-risk patients with HF as continued treatment, and more precise risk stratification may ensue, avoiding inpatient admission. Whether observation unit management is comparable with or superior to the current approach must be determined in a randomized clinical trial. Critical end points include time to symptom resolution and discharge, post-discharge event rates, and a cost-effective analysis of each management strategy. It is the authors' strong assertion that now is the time for such a trial and that the results will be critically important if we are to effectively influence hospitalizations for HF in the near future.

AB - Approximately 800,000 times a year, an emergency physician admits a patient with symptomatic heart failure (HF). Yet only a minority of emergency department patients with HF are severely ill as a result of pulmonary edema, myocardial ischemia, or cardiogenic shock. The majority of patients are not in need of an acute intervention beyond decongestion, and few patients during hospitalization undergo invasive diagnostic testing or therapeutic procedures that require intense monitoring. Although hospitalization is clearly an inflection point, marking a threshold that independently predicts a worse outcome, the exact impact of hospitalization on post-discharge events has not been well elucidated. Thus, large subsets of patients with HF are hospitalized without a clear need for time-sensitive therapies or procedures. The authors estimate that up to 50% of emergency department patients with HF could be safely discharged after a brief period of observation, thus avoiding unnecessary admissions and minimizing readmissions. Observation unit management may be beneficial for low-risk and intermediate-risk patients with HF as continued treatment, and more precise risk stratification may ensue, avoiding inpatient admission. Whether observation unit management is comparable with or superior to the current approach must be determined in a randomized clinical trial. Critical end points include time to symptom resolution and discharge, post-discharge event rates, and a cost-effective analysis of each management strategy. It is the authors' strong assertion that now is the time for such a trial and that the results will be critically important if we are to effectively influence hospitalizations for HF in the near future.

KW - emergency department

KW - heart failure

KW - hospitalization

KW - observation unit

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871912144&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871912144&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.1022

DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.1022

M3 - Review article

C2 - 23273288

AN - SCOPUS:84871912144

VL - 61

SP - 121

EP - 126

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 2

ER -