The WHICH? Trial: Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients

Simon Stewart, Melinda J. Carrington, Thomas Marwick, Patricia M Davidson, Peter MacDonald, John Horowitz, Henry Krum, Phillip J. Newton, Christopher Reid, Paul A. Scuffham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial. Methods WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial that seeks to determine if multidisciplinary management of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients post-acute hospitalization delivered in a patients own home is superior to care delivered via a specialist CHF outpatient clinic. The composite primary endpoint is all-cause, unplanned recurrent hospitalization or death during 1218 months of follow-up. Of 688 eligible patients, 280 patients (73 male and 66 principal diagnosis of CHF) with a mean age of 71 ± 14 years have been randomized to home- (n 143) or clinic-based (n 137) post-discharge management. This will provide 80 power (two-sided alpha of 0.05) to detect a 15 absolute difference in both the primary end-point and rate of all-cause hospital stay. Preliminary data suggest that the two groups are well matched in nearly all baseline socio-economic and clinical parameters. The majority of patients have significant co-morbidity, including hypertension (63), coronary artery disease (55), and atrial fibrillation (53) with an accordingly high Charlson Index of Comorbidity Score (6.1 ± 2.4). Perspective Despite its relatively small size, the WHICH? trial is well placed to examine the relative impact of two of the most commonly applied forms of face-to-face management designed to reduce recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in CHF patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)909-916
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Journal of Heart Failure
Volume13
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Heart Failure
Hospitalization
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Atrial Fibrillation
Comorbidity
Coronary Artery Disease
Length of Stay
Research Design
Randomized Controlled Trials
Economics
Hypertension
Morbidity
Costs and Cost Analysis
Survival

Keywords

  • Chronic heart failure
  • Disease management
  • Left ventricular systolic dysfunction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

The WHICH? Trial : Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients. / Stewart, Simon; Carrington, Melinda J.; Marwick, Thomas; Davidson, Patricia M; MacDonald, Peter; Horowitz, John; Krum, Henry; Newton, Phillip J.; Reid, Christopher; Scuffham, Paul A.

In: European Journal of Heart Failure, Vol. 13, No. 8, 08.2011, p. 909-916.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stewart, Simon ; Carrington, Melinda J. ; Marwick, Thomas ; Davidson, Patricia M ; MacDonald, Peter ; Horowitz, John ; Krum, Henry ; Newton, Phillip J. ; Reid, Christopher ; Scuffham, Paul A. / The WHICH? Trial : Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients. In: European Journal of Heart Failure. 2011 ; Vol. 13, No. 8. pp. 909-916.
@article{b96e0c84dd844e989d2407773cfb6d9a,
title = "The WHICH? Trial: Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients",
abstract = "Aims To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial. Methods WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial that seeks to determine if multidisciplinary management of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients post-acute hospitalization delivered in a patients own home is superior to care delivered via a specialist CHF outpatient clinic. The composite primary endpoint is all-cause, unplanned recurrent hospitalization or death during 1218 months of follow-up. Of 688 eligible patients, 280 patients (73 male and 66 principal diagnosis of CHF) with a mean age of 71 ± 14 years have been randomized to home- (n 143) or clinic-based (n 137) post-discharge management. This will provide 80 power (two-sided alpha of 0.05) to detect a 15 absolute difference in both the primary end-point and rate of all-cause hospital stay. Preliminary data suggest that the two groups are well matched in nearly all baseline socio-economic and clinical parameters. The majority of patients have significant co-morbidity, including hypertension (63), coronary artery disease (55), and atrial fibrillation (53) with an accordingly high Charlson Index of Comorbidity Score (6.1 ± 2.4). Perspective Despite its relatively small size, the WHICH? trial is well placed to examine the relative impact of two of the most commonly applied forms of face-to-face management designed to reduce recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in CHF patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "Chronic heart failure, Disease management, Left ventricular systolic dysfunction",
author = "Simon Stewart and Carrington, {Melinda J.} and Thomas Marwick and Davidson, {Patricia M} and Peter MacDonald and John Horowitz and Henry Krum and Newton, {Phillip J.} and Christopher Reid and Scuffham, {Paul A.}",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1093/eurjhf/hfr048",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "909--916",
journal = "European Journal of Heart Failure",
issn = "1388-9842",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The WHICH? Trial

T2 - Rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients

AU - Stewart, Simon

AU - Carrington, Melinda J.

AU - Marwick, Thomas

AU - Davidson, Patricia M

AU - MacDonald, Peter

AU - Horowitz, John

AU - Krum, Henry

AU - Newton, Phillip J.

AU - Reid, Christopher

AU - Scuffham, Paul A.

PY - 2011/8

Y1 - 2011/8

N2 - Aims To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial. Methods WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial that seeks to determine if multidisciplinary management of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients post-acute hospitalization delivered in a patients own home is superior to care delivered via a specialist CHF outpatient clinic. The composite primary endpoint is all-cause, unplanned recurrent hospitalization or death during 1218 months of follow-up. Of 688 eligible patients, 280 patients (73 male and 66 principal diagnosis of CHF) with a mean age of 71 ± 14 years have been randomized to home- (n 143) or clinic-based (n 137) post-discharge management. This will provide 80 power (two-sided alpha of 0.05) to detect a 15 absolute difference in both the primary end-point and rate of all-cause hospital stay. Preliminary data suggest that the two groups are well matched in nearly all baseline socio-economic and clinical parameters. The majority of patients have significant co-morbidity, including hypertension (63), coronary artery disease (55), and atrial fibrillation (53) with an accordingly high Charlson Index of Comorbidity Score (6.1 ± 2.4). Perspective Despite its relatively small size, the WHICH? trial is well placed to examine the relative impact of two of the most commonly applied forms of face-to-face management designed to reduce recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in CHF patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

AB - Aims To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial. Methods WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial that seeks to determine if multidisciplinary management of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients post-acute hospitalization delivered in a patients own home is superior to care delivered via a specialist CHF outpatient clinic. The composite primary endpoint is all-cause, unplanned recurrent hospitalization or death during 1218 months of follow-up. Of 688 eligible patients, 280 patients (73 male and 66 principal diagnosis of CHF) with a mean age of 71 ± 14 years have been randomized to home- (n 143) or clinic-based (n 137) post-discharge management. This will provide 80 power (two-sided alpha of 0.05) to detect a 15 absolute difference in both the primary end-point and rate of all-cause hospital stay. Preliminary data suggest that the two groups are well matched in nearly all baseline socio-economic and clinical parameters. The majority of patients have significant co-morbidity, including hypertension (63), coronary artery disease (55), and atrial fibrillation (53) with an accordingly high Charlson Index of Comorbidity Score (6.1 ± 2.4). Perspective Despite its relatively small size, the WHICH? trial is well placed to examine the relative impact of two of the most commonly applied forms of face-to-face management designed to reduce recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in CHF patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

KW - Chronic heart failure

KW - Disease management

KW - Left ventricular systolic dysfunction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79961055835&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79961055835&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/eurjhf/hfr048

DO - 10.1093/eurjhf/hfr048

M3 - Article

C2 - 21616952

AN - SCOPUS:79961055835

VL - 13

SP - 909

EP - 916

JO - European Journal of Heart Failure

JF - European Journal of Heart Failure

SN - 1388-9842

IS - 8

ER -