Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2023 Sep;16(9):e010278.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.122.010278. Epub 2023 Jul 26.

DASH-HF Study: A Pragmatic Quality Improvement Randomized Implementation Trial for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

DASH-HF Study: A Pragmatic Quality Improvement Randomized Implementation Trial for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Aradhana Verma et al. Circ Heart Fail. 2023 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Heart failure is a prevailing diagnosis of hospitalization and readmission within 6 months, and nearly a quarter of these patients die within a year. Guideline-directed medication therapies reduce risk of mortality by 73% over 2 years; however, the implementation of these therapies to their target dose in clinical practice continues to be challenging. In 2020, the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System developed a HF dashboard to monitor and improve outpatient HF management. The DASH-HF (Dashboard Activated Services and Telehealth for Heart Failure) study is a randomized, pragmatic clinical trial to evaluate proactive dashboard-directed telehealth clinics to improve the use and dosing of guideline-directed medication therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction not on optimal guideline-directed medication therapy within the VA.

Methods: Three hundred veterans with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction met inclusion criteria with an optimization potential score (OPS) of 5 or less out of 10, representing nonoptimal guideline-directed medication therapy. The primary outcome was a composite score of guideline-directed medical therapy, the OPS, 6 months after the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included active prescriptions for each individual guideline-directed medical therapy class, HF-related hospitalizations, deaths, and clinician time per patient during the intervention clinics.

Results: There was no significant difference between the intervention arm and usual care group in the primary outcome (OPS, 2.9; SD=2.1 versus OPS, 2.6, SD=2.1); adjusted mean difference 0.3 (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.7) or in the prespecified secondary outcomes for hospitalization and all-cause mortality for the intervention of proactive dashboard-based clinics.

Conclusions: A dashboard-based clinic intervention did not improve the OPS or secondary outcomes of hospitalization and all-cause mortality. There remains a larger opportunity to better target patients and provide more intensive follow-up to further evaluate the utility of proactive dashboard-based clinics for HF management and quality improvement.

Registration: URL: https://www.

Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT05001165.

Keywords: guideline-directed medical therapy; heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; medications; quality improvement; telehealth.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures Dr Fonarow reports consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. There are no disclosures for the other authors.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Consort Diagram of Trial
VA Veterans Affairs, HF heart failure, OPS Optimization Potential Score
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Distribution of Baseline and Follow-up OPS By Treatment Group
Optimization Potential Score (OPS) distribution in the usual group versus intervention group at baseline (top) and 6 months post-intervention (bottom). Note that the baseline OPS ranges from 0 to 5 based on the study design.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ziaeian B, Fonarow GC. The Prevention of Hospital Readmissions in Heart Failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2016;58(4):379–385. doi:10.1016/J.PCAD.2015.09.004 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Agarwal MA, Fonarow GC, Ziaeian B. National Trends in Heart Failure Hospitalizations and Readmissions From 2010 to 2017. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6(8):952–956. doi:10.1001/JAMACARDIO.2020.7472 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Setoguchi S, Stevenson LW. Hospitalizations in Patients With Heart Failure: Who and Why. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(18):1703–1705. doi:10.1016/J.JACC.2009.08.015 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Parizo JT, Kohsaka S, Sandhu AT, Patel J, Heidenreich PA. Trends in Readmission and Mortality Rates Following Heart Failure Hospitalization in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System From 2007 to 2017. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5(9):1042–1047. doi:10.1001/JAMACARDIO.2020.2028 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Greene SJ, Butler J, Fonarow GC. Simultaneous or Rapid Sequence Initiation of Quadruple Medical Therapy for Heart Failure—Optimizing Therapy With the Need for Speed. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6(7):743–744. doi:10.1001/JAMACARDIO.2021.0496 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data