Disease management programme for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease and heart failure in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Aims

To evaluate the effect of a disease management programme for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) in primary care.

Methods

A cluster randomised controlled trial of 1316 patients with CHD and CHF from 20 primary care practices in the UK was carried out. Care in the intervention practices was delivered by specialist nurses trained in the management of patients with CHD and CHF. Usual care was delivered by the primary healthcare team in the control practices.

Results

At follow up, significantly more patients with a history of myocardial infarction in the intervention group were prescribed a beta‐blocker compared to the control group (adjusted OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.99). Significantly more patients with CHD in the intervention group had adequate management of their blood pressure (<140/85?mm Hg) (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.13) and their cholesterol (<5?mmol/l) (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.37) compared to those in the control group. Significantly more patients with an unconfirmed diagnosis of CHF had a diagnosis of left ventricular systolic dysfunction confirmed (OR 4.69, 95% CI 1.88 to 11.66) or excluded (OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.50 to 9.64) in the intervention group compared to the control group. There were significant improvements in some quality‐of‐life measures in patients with CHD in the intervention group.

Conclusions

Disease management programmes can lead to improvements in the care of patients with CHD and presumed CHF in primary care.Cardiovascular diseases including coronary heart disease (CHD) and chronic heart failure (CHF) are the main cause of morbidity and mortality in most European countries.¹ Mortality from cardiovascular disease has declined over the last 30 years, a trend which has been attributed to secondary prevention therapies.^2,3 However, European surveys have shown considerable potential for improved levels of secondary prevention in people with established CHD.⁴ Studies in primary care, where most of these patients are managed, have also reported considerable potential to further increase secondary prevention through medical and lifestyle interventions.^5,6 “Medical” measures include aspirin therapy and blood pressure and lipid control, while “lifestyle” measures include increased exercise, dietary modification and smoking cessation.⁵ CHF is also a highly prevalent, chronic condition with high mortality and morbidity. It is increasing in prevalence and the public health burden from CHF is therefore likely to rise substantially over the next 10?years.⁷ The quality of life of patients with CHF is worse than for most chronic conditions managed in primary care and five‐year survival is worse than for many malignant conditions.⁸ However, appropriate treatment, including inhibitors of the renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system and beta‐blockers, has the potential to reduce hospitalisation and mortality in these patients.^9,10 The task of implementing a comprehensive package of effective measures for large numbers of patients has been described as daunting.⁵ It is therefore important to develop implementation strategies that are practical and effective. Many patients with CHF are incorrectly diagnosed and inadequately treated in primary care¹¹ and obstacles to appropriate primary care management include lack of knowledge, fear of complications with pharmacological treatments, lack of time and limited facilities for investigations.^12,13Systematic reviews indicate that secondary prevention programmes improve the process of care, reduce admissions to hospital and enhance quality of life or functional status in patients with CHD.¹⁴ Similarly, systematic reviews of disease management programmes in CHF suggest that specialised, multidisciplinary follow‐up can reduce hospitalisation and may lead to cost saving.^15,16,17 However, all the CHF trials included in these systematic reviews were conducted in highly specialised centres and recruited patients following discharge after hospitalisation. The applicability of the available CHF management programmes to countries with a primary care‐based healthcare system has therefore recently been questioned.¹⁸To achieve improved secondary prevention of CHD and CHF, primary care will need to adopt a systematic approach. Although disease management clinics for the management of CHD in primary care can improve patients'' outcomes,⁵ there are no such studies in the management of patients with CHF. Since the majority of patients with CHF will also have CHD,¹⁹ we investigated the effect of a disease management programme for patients with either or both conditions in primary care.