Pharmacological Trials on Heart Failure: What Can We Translate into Daily Clinical Practice?
Adherence to evidence-based medicine is the accepted goal to which doctors should aspire in their clinical practice. In the last 20 years, large-scale controlled trials have been conducted in patients with chronic heart failure. These trials used clinically important outcome measures including death and major morbid events. The assignment of patients to treatments was randomized, the number of patients was adequate, and the follow-up was complete and reasonably long in order to provide the required number of events to generally ensure the necessary statistical power for unequivocal interpretation of the results. Accordingly, there is now evidence on the safety and efficacy of a variety of treatments for heart failure. However, a number of clinical surveys in various countries, both in primary care and in hospital practice, revealed that a significant proportion of eligible patients are not receiving treatments that would increase both the quality and the length of their life. If under-treatment can have an adverse economic effect in terms of increased hospitalizations, incorporating these results into clinical practice would reduce the burden on health care systems . Despite these obvious considerations, however, it appears that translation of the trial results into clinical practice has often been slow and incomplete.
KeywordsHeart Failure Chronic Heart Failure Daily Clinical Practice Important Outcome Measure Heart Failure Diagnosis
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Berry C, Murdoch DR, McMurray JJ (2001) Economics of chronic heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 3:283–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs FDR, Wilson S, Jones MI et al (2000) European survey on primary care physician perceptions and practice in heart failure diagnosis and management (Euro-HF Study). Eur Heart J 21:1877–1887PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMurray JJ, Chen-Solal A, Dietz R et al (2001) Practical recommendations for the use of ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers and spironolactone in heart failure: putting guidelines into practice. Eur J Heart Fail 3:495–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharpe N (2002) Clinical trials and the real world: selection bias and generalisability of trials results. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 16(1) 75–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felch WC (1997) Bridging the gap between research and practice. The role of continuing medical education. JAMA 277:155–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houghton A, Cowley A (1997) Why are angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors under-utilised in the treatment of heart failure by general practitioners? Int J Cardiol 59:7–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reis SE, Holubkov R, Edmundosicz D et al (1997) Treatment of patients admitted to the hospital with congestive heart failure: specialty related disparities in practice patterns and outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 30:733–738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maggioni AP, Tavazzi L (1999) Introducing new treatments in clinical practice: the Italian approach to beta blockers in heart failure. Heart 81:453–454PubMedGoogle Scholar
Sleight P (1999) A Napoleonic future for cardiology. Heart 81:455PubMedGoogle Scholar
Opasich C, Tavazzi L, Lucci D et al (2000) Comparison of one-year outcome in women versus men with congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 86:353–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woosley RL (2000) Centers for education and research in therapeutics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 68:109–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawlins M (1999) In pursuit of quality: the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Lancet 353:1079–1082PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
© Springer-Verlag Italia 2003