Does specialist review for patients with suspected heart failure predict better outcomes? An observational study on the utility of compliance with NICE guidelines.

Objectives: Compare outcomes in patients with suspected heart failure (HF) and raised natriuretic peptides who are reviewed in a specialist HF clinic in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines (compliant group) versus patients who are not reviewed in the clinic (non-compliant group).

Design: Retrospective observational study.

Setting: Single large UK district general hospital.

Participants: 567 consecutive patients in primary care with raised N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) levels (>400 pg/mL) from February to September 2014.

Interventions: 161 (28%) patients were referred to the specialist HF clinic and 406 (72%) were not. Outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Outcome Measures: All-cause and cardiovascular (CV) hospitalisations and all-cause mortality.

Results: The compliant group were slightly younger than the non-compliant group (78±9 vs 80±9; p=0.019) but had much higher NT-pro-BNP (3108±4526 vs 2271±3637 pg/mL; p<0.0001). Despite this, over a mean follow-up period of 9±2 months, rates of all-cause hospitalisation (24% vs 44%; p<0.0001) and CV hospitalisation (3% vs 15%, p<0.0001) were significantly lower in the compliant group versus the non-compliant group, respectively. There was no significant difference in mortality rates (6% compliant group vs 8% non-compliant group; p=0.487).

Conclusions: Hospitalisation rates in patients with suspected HF and raised NT-pro-BNP were extremely high over a relatively short follow-up period. Patients reviewed in a specialist HF clinic had much higher NT-pro-BNP levels, suggesting they were at higher risk of adverse outcomes, yet also had significantly lower rates of all-cause and CV hospitalisation. Our findings support implementation of the relevant NICE guidelines for patients with suspected HF.