eCite Digital Repository

The WHICH? trial: rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients

Citation

Stewart, S and Carrington, MJ and Marwick, TH and Davidson, PM and Macdonald, P and Horowitz, J and Krum, H and Newton, PJ and Reid, C and Scuffham, PA, The WHICH? trial: rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized, multicentre comparison of home- vs. clinic-based management of chronic heart failure patients, European Journal of Heart Failure, 13, (8) pp. 909-916. ISSN 1388-9842 (2011) [Refereed Article]

Copyright Statement

Copyright 2011 the authors: Simon Stewart, Melinda J. Carrington, Thomas Marwick, Patricia M. Davidson,Peter Macdonald, John Horowitz, Henry Krum, Phillip J. Newton, Christopher Reid, and Paul A. Scuffham.

DOI: doi:10.1093/eurjhf/hfr048

Abstract

Aims To describe the rationale and design of the Which Heart failure Intervention is most Cost-effective & consumer friendly in reducing Hospital care (WHICH?) trial.
Methods WHICH? is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial that seeks to determine if multidisciplinary management of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients post-acute hospitalization delivered in a patient's own home is superior to care delivered via a specialist CHF outpatient clinic. The composite primary endpoint is all-cause, unplanned recurrent hospitalization or death during 12–18 months of follow-up. Of 688 eligible patients, 280 patients (73% male and 66% principal diagnosis of CHF) with a mean age of 71 ± 14 years have been randomized to home- (n = 143) or clinic-based (n = 137) post-discharge management. This will provide 80% power (two-sided alpha of 0.05) to detect a 15% absolute difference in both the primary end-point and rate of all-cause hospital stay. Preliminary data suggest that the two groups are well matched in nearly all baseline socio-economic and clinical parameters. The majority of patients have significant co-morbidity, including hypertension (63%), coronary artery disease (55%), and atrial fibrillation (53%) with an accordingly high Charlson Index of Comorbidity Score (6.1 ± 2.4).
Perspective Despite its relatively small size, the WHICH? trial is well placed to examine the relative impact of two of the most commonly applied forms of face-to-face management designed to reduce recurrent hospitalization and prolong survival in CHF patients.

Item Details

Item Type:Refereed Article
Keywords:chronic heart failure, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, disease management
Research Division:Biomedical and Clinical Sciences
Research Group:Cardiovascular medicine and haematology
Research Field:Cardiology (incl. cardiovascular diseases)
Objective Division:Health
Objective Group:Clinical health
Objective Field:Clinical health not elsewhere classified
UTAS Author:Marwick, TH (Professor Tom Marwick)
ID Code:90965
Year Published:2011
Web of Science® Times Cited:32
Deposited By:Menzies Institute for Medical Research
Deposited On:2014-05-05
Last Modified:2020-09-22
Downloads:0

Repository Staff Only: item control page