Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 19, 2026

A Novel Digital Platform for a Monitored Home-based Cardiac Rehabilitation Program
Published on: April 19, 2019
Heart failure care in a hospital unit: a comparison of standard 3-month and extended 6-month programs
Mark Ledwidge1, Enda Ryan, Christina O'Loughlin
1St Vincent's University Hospital HF Unit, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Insights
Extending heart failure (HF) programs beyond 3 months did not reduce death or readmissions in a 2-year study. Patients may still benefit from continued access to HF management services.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Medicine
- Public Health
Background:
- Structured heart failure (HF) programs improve outcomes post-discharge.
- Previous research demonstrated benefits of a 3-month HF program.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of extending a standard 3-month HF program to 6 months.
- To assess the effect on death and readmission rates over a 2-year follow-up.
Main Methods:
- Prospective randomized controlled study of 130 patients with NYHA class IV HF.
- Patients were randomized to an extended 6-month program (EP) or standard 3-month care (SP).
- Primary endpoint: death and/or unplanned HF rehospitalization at 2 years.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in death or HF readmissions between EP (38.7%) and SP (30.9%) groups (p=0.348).
- Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no difference in outcomes (p=0.315).
- No differences in unscheduled visits or non-HF readmissions were observed.
Conclusions:
- Extending structured HF disease management programs beyond 3 months offers no significant clinical advantage regarding death or readmission.
- Patients may require ongoing access to HF services for continued support and prevention of clinical decline.
- Optimal organization of HF management programs warrants further consideration.
Background:
We have previously shown that a structured in-hospital and outpatient heart failure (HF) program reduces clinical events over a 3-month period following hospital discharge.
Aims:
This prospective randomized controlled study examines the additional benefits of extending the standard 3-month HF program to 6 months on death and readmission over a 2-year follow-up period.
Methods:
Of 161 patients admitted with NYHA class IV HF who completed the standard 3-month HF program, 130 consenting patients (mean age 69.9+/-12.2 years, 65% male) were randomized to the extended 6-month HF program (EP; n=62) or standard care (SP; n=68). The primary endpoint was death and/or unplanned rehospitalization for HF at 2 years postrandomization.
Results:
In the 2-year follow-up period, there were eight people with unplanned hospitalizations for HF and 16 deaths in the EP group (event rate 38.7%) compared to seven people with unplanned HF readmissions and 14 deaths in the SP group (event rate 30.9%, p=0.348 versus EP). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated no difference in outcome between standard and extended program (p=0.315). There were no differences between the groups in terms of unscheduled clinic visits or non-HF-related readmissions in the 2-year follow-up period.
Conclusions:
There is no measured clinical advantage in terms of death and/or HF readmission in extending a structured hospital-based disease management program for HF beyond 3 months postdischarge. However, it appears that patients continue to need access to the service to help abort clinical deteriorations, and this may have implication for the optimal organisation of such programs.
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Cardiomyopathy VI: Nursing Management
Heart Failure VII: Nursing Interventions
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure IV: Classification and Diagnostic Evaluation
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy