Roadmap for cardiovascular education across the European Society of Cardiology: inspiring better knowledge and skills, now and for the future

Effect of Metrics-Based Simulation Training to Proficiency on Procedure Quality and Errors Among Novice Cardiac Device Implanters: The IMPROF Randomized Trial

Importance

In cardiac device implant training, there is no common system to objectively assess trainees' ability to perform tasks at predetermined performance levels before in vivo practice; therefore, patients are potentially exposed to risks related to operators' early learning curve.

Objective

To assess the effect on implant performance quality of novel metrics-based simulation training to proficiency (proficiency-based progression [PBP]) vs traditional simulation-based training (SBT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prospective randomized trial, conducted between March 8, 2022 and November 24, 2022, novice implanters were randomized (blinded) 1:1 to participate in an SBT curriculum (procedural knowledge e-learning and in-person simulation training) at an international skills training center, with proficiency demonstration requirements at each training stage for advancing (PBP approach) or without the requirements. Ultimately, trainees performed a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implant using virtual reality simulation. The procedure was video-recorded and subsequently scored using previously validated metrics by 2 independent assessors blinded to group. Physicians who had already implanted more than 20 pacemakers or defibrillators and fewer than 200 CRT systems as the first operator were eligible. Thirty-two implanters from 10 countries voluntarily enrolled in the training program and were randomized; 30 (15 per group) started and completed training. Data analysis was performed from November 27 to December 22, 2022.

Intervention

Training with PBP vs SBT.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcome comprised 4 objectively assessed performance metrics derived from the video-recordings: number of procedural steps completed, errors, critical errors, and all errors combined.

Results

Baseline experience of the 30 participants (19 [63%] male; mean [SD] number of years in implant practice, 2.0 [1.8]; median [IQR] number of implanted pacemakers or defibrillators, 47.5 [30.0-115.0]; median [IQR] number of implanted CRT systems, 3.0 [1.25-10.0]) was similar between study groups. Compared with the SBT group, the PBP group completed 27% more procedural steps (median [IQR], 31 [30-32] vs 24 [22-27]; P < .001) and made 73% fewer errors (median [IQR], 2 [1-3] vs 7 [5-8]; P < .001), 84% fewer critical errors (median [IQR], 1 [0-1] vs 3 [3-5]; P < .001), and 77% fewer all errors combined (errors plus critical errors) (median [IQR], 3 [1-3] vs 11 [8-12]; P < .001); 14 of the 15 PBP trainees (93%) demonstrated the predefined target performance level vs 0 of the 15 SBT trainees.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized trial, the PBP approach to novice implanter training generated superior objectively assessed performance vs SBT. If implemented broadly and systematically, PBP training may ensure safe and effective performance standards before trainees proceed to (supervised) in vivo practice. Future studies are needed to verify implications on procedure-related patient complications.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05952908.

CODE-EHR best practice framework for the use of structured electronic healthcare records in clinical research

Big data is central to new developments in global clinical science aiming to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the routine use of structured electronic healthcare records with the potential to address key gaps in clinical evidence. The covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated the potential of big data and related analytics, but also important pitfalls. Verification, validation, and data privacy, as well as the social mandate to undertake research are key challenges. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including patient representatives, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors and industry. We propose the CODE-EHR Minimum Standards Framework as a means to improve the design of studies, enhance transparency and develop a roadmap towards more robust and effective utilisation of healthcare data for research purposes.

CODE-EHR best-practice framework for the use of structured electronic health-care records in clinical research

Big data is important to new developments in global clinical science that aim to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the regular use of structured electronic health-care records with the potential to address key deficits in clinical evidence that could improve patient care. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown this potential in big data and related analytics but has also revealed important limitations. Data verification, data validation, data privacy, and a mandate from the public to conduct research are important challenges to effective use of routine health-care data. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including representation from patients, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors, and industry members. In this Review, we propose the CODE-EHR minimum standards framework to be used by researchers and clinicians to improve the design of studies and enhance transparency of study methods. The CODE-EHR framework aims to develop robust and effective utilisation of health-care data for research purposes.

Nurse-led vs. usual-care for atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Nurse-led integrated care is expected to improve outcome of patients with atrial fibrillation compared with usual-care provided by a medical specialist.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We randomized 1375 patients with atrial fibrillation (64 ± 10 years, 44% women, 57% had CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2) to receive nurse-led care or usual-care. Nurse-led care was provided by specialized nurses using a decision-support tool, in consultation with the cardiologist. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death and cardiovascular hospital admissions. Of 671 nurse-led care patients, 543 (81%) received anticoagulation in full accordance with the guidelines against 559 of 683 (82%) usual-care patients. The cumulative adherence to guidelines-based recommendations was 61% under nurse-led care and 26% under usual-care. Over 37 months of follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 164 of 671 patients (9.7% per year) under nurse-led care and in 192 of 683 patients (11.6% per year) under usual-care [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.04, P = 0.12]. There were 124 vs. 161 hospitalizations for arrhythmia events (7.0% and 9.4% per year), and 14 vs. 22 for heart failure (0.7% and 1.1% per year), respectively. Results were not consistent in a pre-specified subgroup analysis by centre experience, with a HR of 0.52 (95% CI 0.37-to 0.71) in four experienced centres and of 1.24 (95% CI 0.94-1.63) in four less experienced centres (P for interaction <0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our trial failed to show that nurse-led care was superior to usual-care. The data suggest that nurse-led care by an experienced team could be clinically beneficial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01740037).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01740037).

Unravelling heart failure nurses' education: Content comparison of heart failure nurses' education in three European Society of Cardiology states and the Heart Failure Association heart failure curriculum

AIMS

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines state that heart failure nurse specialists (heart-failure nurses) with specific competences are essential for a successful heart-failure-management programme. Thus, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC developed the heart failure nurse curriculum (HFA curriculum). Several ESC member states developed cardiovascular education programmes to enable nurses to deliver high specialist care, but little is known of whether these curricula are in line with the HFA curriculum. Therefore, this paper describes the extent to which cardiovascular education programmes in Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany correspond to the HFA curriculum.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A case study approach was adopted to obtain an in-depth understanding of the programme contents in relation to the HFA curriculum. For this purpose, representatives of the educational programmes and/or delegates of the national cardiovascular nursing organization shared their educational curricula. All of the studied cardiovascular education programmes aim to provide heart failure and/or cardiovascular nurses with essential competences for implementation of evidence based and guideline derived care. However, every cardiovascular education programme has a different focus/area of attention. Cardiovascular education in Belgium discusses aspects of all core-learning objectives of the HFA curriculum and emphasizes mostly knowledge aspects of these. Learning objectives in cardiovascular education in The Netherlands focus on chronic diseases in general and on learning objectives concerning patient education, support in self-care and management of device and pharmacological therapy. Cardiovascular education in Germany discusses most learning objectives; however, not all learning objectives receive equal attention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local cardiovascular education programmes adopt certain aspects of the HF curriculum, the curriculum as a whole is not adopted.

Characteristics of patients initiated on edoxaban in Europe: baseline data from edoxaban treatment in routine clinical practice for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Europe (ETNA-AF-Europe)

Background

Non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have substantially improved anticoagulation therapy for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The available routine care data have demonstrated the safety of different NOACs; however, such data for edoxaban are scarce. Here, we report baseline characteristics of 13,638 edoxaban-treated patients with AF enrolled between November 2016 and February 2018.

Methods

ETNA-AF-Europe is a multinational, multi-centre, post-authorisation, observational study conducted in 825 sites in 10 European countries. Patients will be followed up for four years.

Results

Overall, 13,980 patients were enrolled of which 342 patients were excluded from the analysis. Mean patient age was 73.6 years with an average creatinine clearance of 69.4 mL/min. 56.6% were male. The calculated CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED mean scores were 3.1 and 2.6, respectively. Overall, 3.3, 14.6 and 82.0% of patients had low (CHA₂DS₂-VASc = 0), intermediate (CHA₂DS₂-VASc = 1) and high (CHA₂DS₂-VASc≥2) risks of stroke, respectively. High-risk patients (those with prior stroke, prior major bleeding, prior intracranial bleed or CHA₂DS₂-VASc ≥4) comprised 38.4% of the overall population. For 75.1% of patients edoxaban was their first anticoagulant prescription, whilst 16.9% switched from a VKA and 8.0% from another NOAC. A total of 23.4% of patients in ETNA-AF-Europe received the reduced dose of edoxaban 30 mg. Overall, 83.8% of patients received an edoxaban dose in line with the criteria outlined in the label.

Conclusion

Edoxaban was predominantly initiated in older, often anticoagulation-naïve, unselected European patients with AF, with a good overall adherence to the approved label.

Trial registration

NCT02944019; Date of registration: October 24, 2016.