Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes of acute heart failure patients managed in the emergency department

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Acute heart failure is a serious condition commonly seen in the emergency department (ED). The HEARTRISK6 Scale has been recently developed to identify the risk of poor outcomes but has not been tested. We sought to describe the management and outcomes of ED patients with acute heart failure and to evaluate the potential impact of the HEARTRISK6 Scale.

Methods

We conducted a health records review of 300 consecutive acute heart failure patients presenting to two tertiary care EDs. Two evaluators abstracted clinical variables, ED management and treatment details, and patient outcomes using the electronic health records platform (EPIC) and attending physicians verified the data. The primary outcome measure was a short-term serious outcome, as shown in Results. In addition, the HEARTRISK6 score was calculated retrospectively.

Results

We included 300 patients with mean age of 78.5 years, 51.0% male, 56.3% arrival by ambulance, and 67.0% admitted to hospital. 25.3% experienced a short-term serious outcome 1) after admission (N = 201): non-invasive ventilation 14.9%, intubation 1.5%, major cardiac procedure 5.0%, myocardial infarction 2.0%, death 8.5%; 2) after ED discharge (N = 99): return to ED 21.2%, death 4.0%. Those initially admitted experienced a much higher proportion of serious outcomes compared to those discharged (29.9% vs. 16.2%). A HEARTRISK6 Scale cut-point score of ≥ 1 would have had a sensitivity of 91.0%, specificity 24.5%, and negative likelihood ratio 0.37 for short-term serious outcomes and suggested hospital admission for 80.7% of cases.

Conclusion

There was a large range of severity of illness of acute heart failure patients and a wide variety of treatments were administered in the ED. Both admitted and discharged patients experienced a high proportion of poor outcomes. The HEARTRISK6 Scale showed a high sensitivity for short-term serious outcomes but with the potential to increase hospital admissions. Further validation of the HEARTRISK6 Scale is required before routine clinical use.

Résumé

Arrière-plan

L’insuffisance cardiaque aiguë est une affection grave couramment observée à l’urgence. L’échelle HEARTRISK6 a été mise au point récemment pour identifier le risque de mauvais résultats, mais n’a pas été testée. Nous avons cherché à décrire la prise en charge et les résultats des patients atteints d’insuffisance cardiaque aiguë et à évaluer l’impact potentiel de l’échelle HEARTRISK6.

Méthodes

Nous avons effectué un examen des dossiers de santé de 300 patients atteints d’insuffisance cardiaque aiguë consécutifs qui se présentaient à deux SU de soins tertiaires. Deux évaluateurs ont résumé les variables cliniques, les détails de la gestion et du traitement des SU et les résultats pour les patients à l’aide de la plateforme de dossiers de santé électroniques (EPIC). et les médecins traitants ont vérifié les données. La principale mesure des résultats était le résultat grave à court terme, comme le montrent les résultats. De plus, le score HEARTRISK6 a été calculé rétrospectivement.

Résultats

Nous avons inclus 300 patients âgés en moyenne de 78,5 ans, 51,0 % d’hommes, 56,3 % d’arrivées par ambulance et 67,0 % d’hospitalisations. 25,3 % ont connu un résultat grave à court terme 1) après l’admission (N=201) : ventilation non invasive 14,9 %, intubation 1,5 %, procédure cardiaque majeure 5,0 %, infarctus du myocarde 2,0 %, décès 8,5 %; 2) après le congé de l’urgence (N=99) : retour à l’urgence 21,2 %, décès 4,0 %. Les personnes admises au départ ont connu une proportion beaucoup plus élevée de résultats graves que les personnes libérées (29,9 % contre 16,2 %). Une note de seuil de 1 sur l’échelle HEARTRISK6 aurait eu une sensibilité de 91,0 %, une spécificité de 24,5 % et un ratio de probabilité négatif de 0,37 pour les résultats graves à court terme et une admission à l’hôpital suggérée pour 80,7 % des cas.

Conclusion

Il y avait un large éventail de gravité de la maladie des patients atteints d’insuffisance cardiaque aiguë et une grande variété de traitements ont été administrés à l’urgence. Les patients admis et libérés ont connu une forte proportion de mauvais résultats. L’échelle HEARTRISK6 a montré une sensibilité élevée pour les résultats graves à court terme, mais avec le potentiel d’augmenter les admissions à l’hôpital. Une validation plus poussée de l’échelle HEARTRISK6 est nécessaire avant l’utilisation clinique de routine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Anonymized data may be available upon request.

References

  1. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: executive summary: a report of the American college of cardiology foundation/American heart association task force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;62(16):1495–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European society of cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the heart failure association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(27):2129–200. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128. (ehw128 [pii]).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ezekowitz JA, O’Meara E, McDonald MA, et al. Comprehensive update of the Canadian cardiovascular society guidelines for the management of heart failure. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33(11):1342–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2017.08.022. (published Online First: 2017/11/08]).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McDonald MA, Ashley EA, Fedak PWM, et al. Mind the gap: current challenges and future state of heart failure care. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33(11):1434–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2017.08.023. (published Online First: 2017/11/08).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Collins SP, Jenkins CA, Harrell FE Jr, et al. Identification of emergency department patients with acute heart failure at low risk for 30-Day adverse events: the STRATIFY decision tool. JACC Heart Fail. 2015;3(10):737–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchf.2015.05.007. (S2213-1779(15)00414-X [pii]).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Garcia-Gutierrez S, Quintana JM, Antón-Ladislao A, et al. Creation and validation of the acute heart failure risk score: AHFRS. Intern Emerg Med. 2017;12(8):1197–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-016-1541-4. (published Online First: 2016/10/13).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hsiao J, Motta M, Wyer P. Validating the acute heart failure index for patients presenting to the emergency department with decompensated heart failure. Emerg Med J. 2012;29(12): e5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee DS, Stitt A, Austin PC, et al. Prediction of heart failure mortality in emergent care: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(11):767–261.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Greig D, Austin PC, Zhou L, et al. Ischemic electrocardiographic abnormalities and prognosis in decompensated heart failure. Circ Heart Fail. 2014;7(6):986–93. https://doi.org/10.1161/circheartfailure.114.001460. (published Online First: 2014/10/05).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gil V, Miró Ò, Schull MJ, et al. Emergency heart failure mortality risk grade score performance for 7-day mortality prediction in patients with heart failure attended at the emergency department: validation in a Spanish cohort. Eur J Emerg Med. 2018;25(3):169–77. https://doi.org/10.1097/mej.0000000000000422. (published Online First: 2016/09/14).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Martín-Sánchez FJ, Gil V, Llorens P, et al. Barthel index-enhanced feedback for effective cardiac treatment (BI-EFFECT) study: contribution of the Barthel index to the heart failure risk scoring system model in elderly adults with acute heart failure in the emergency department. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60(3):493–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03845.x. (published Online First: 2012/02/15).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee DS, Lee JS, Schull MJ, et al. Prospective validation of the emergency heart failure mortality risk grade for acute heart failure. Circulation. 2019;139(9):1146–56. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.118.035509. (published Online First: 2018/12/28).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Miró Ò, Rossello X, Gil V, et al. Predicting 30-Day mortality for patients with acute heart failure in the emergency department: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167(10):698–705. https://doi.org/10.7326/m16-2726. (published Online First:2017/10/04).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Miró Ò, Rossello X, Gil V, et al. Analysis of how emergency physicians’ decisions to hospitalize or discharge patients with acute heart failure match the clinical risk categories of the MEESSI-AHF scale. Ann Emerg Med. 2019;74(2):204–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.03.010. (published Online First: 2019/05/31).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stiell IG, Perry JJ, Clement CM, et al. Creation and evaluation of the HEARTRISK6 scoring system for acute heart failure. Acad Emerg Med. 2022;29:S1–S159

    Google Scholar 

  16. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Brison RJ, et al. A risk scoring system to identify emergency department patients with heart failure at high risk for serious adverse events. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20(1):17–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stiell IG, Perry JJ, Clement CM, et al. Prospective and explicit clinical validation of the Ottawa heart failure risk scale, with and without use of quantitative NT-proBNP. Acad Emerg Med. 2017;24(3):316–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Benchimol EI, Smeeth L, Guttmann A, et al. The Reporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001885. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001885. (published Online First: 20151006).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(36):3599–726. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab368. (published Online First: 2021/08/28).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Heidenreich PA, Bozkurt B, Aguilar D, et al. AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(17):e263–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.012. (published Online First: 2022/04/06).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Michaud AM, Parker SIA, Ganshorn H, et al. Prediction of early adverse events in emergency department patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review. Can J Cardiol. 2018;34(2):168–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2017.09.004. (published Online First: 2017/12/31).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee DS, Straus SE, Farkouh ME, et al. Trial of an intervention to improve acute heart failure outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2211680. (published Online First: 20221105).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thank you to Angela Marcantonio, Carolyne Kennedy, and Catherine Clement for their support of this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Jessica Poliwoda

  2. Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Lisa Mielniczuk

  3. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Debra Eagles, Krishan Yadav & Ian G. Stiell

  4. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Debra Eagles, Krishan Yadav, Marie-Joe Nemnom & Ian G. Stiell

  5. Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI), Dublin, Ireland

    Charlotte Grace Walmsley

Authors
  1. Jessica Poliwoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Debra Eagles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Krishan Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marie-Joe Nemnom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Charlotte Grace Walmsley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lisa Mielniczuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ian G. Stiell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ian G. Stiell.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Poliwoda, J., Eagles, D., Yadav, K. et al. Outcomes of acute heart failure patients managed in the emergency department. Can J Emerg Med 25, 752–760 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00555-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00555-6

Keywords

Mots clés

Search

Navigation