Background Heart failure presents a growing clinical and economic burden in the USA. Robust cost data on the burden of illness are critical to inform economic evaluations of new therapeutic interventions. Objectives This systematic literature review of heart failure-related costs in the USA aimed to assess the quality of the published evidence and provide a narrative synthesis of current data. Methods Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLit, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination York Database, including the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and Health Technology Assessment Database) were searched for journal articles published between January 2014 and March 2020. The review, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019134201), was restricted to cost-of-illness studies in adults with heart failure events in the USA. Results Eighty-seven studies were included, 41 of which allowed a comparison of cost estimates across studies. The annual median total medical costs for heart failure care were estimated at $24,383 per patient, with heart failure-specific hospitalizations driving costs (median $15,879 per patient). Analyses of subgroups revealed that heart failure-related costs are highly sensitive to individual patient characteristics (such as the presence of comorbidities and age) with large variations even within a subgroup. Additionally, differences in study design and a lack of standardized reporting limited the ability to compare cost estimates. The finding that costs are higher for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction compared with patients with preserved ejection fraction highlights the need for differentiating among different heart failure types. Conclusions The review underpins the conclusion drawn in earlier reviews, namely that hospitalization costs are the key driver of heart failure-related costs. Analyses of subgroups provide a clearer understanding of sources of heterogeneity in cost data. While current cost estimates provide useful indications of economic burden, understanding the nuances of the data is critical to support its application.

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are economic tools that elicit the stated preferences of respondents. Because of their increasing importance in informing the design of health products and services, it is critical to understand the extent to which DCEs give reliable predictions outside of the experimental context. We systematically reviewed the literature of published DCE studies comparing predictions to choices made in reality; we extracted individual-level data to estimate a bivariate mixed-effects model of pooled sensitivity and specificity. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and six of these gave sufficient data for inclusion in a meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were 88% (95% CI 81, 92%) and 34% (95% CI 23, 46%), respectively, and the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.60 (95% CI 0.55, 0.64). Results indicate that DCEs can produce reasonable predictions of health-related behaviors. There is a great need for future research on the external validity of DCEs, particularly empirical studies assessing predicted and revealed preferences of a representative sample of participants.

Summary. Background: Anticoagulation management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) should be tailored individually on the basis of ischemic stroke risk. The objective of this study was to compare the predictive ability of 15 published stratification schemes for stroke risk in actual clinical practice in the UK. Methods: AF patients aged ≥ 18 years in the General Practice Research Database, which contains computerized medical records, were included. The c‐statistic was estimated to determine the predictive ability for stroke for each scheme. Outcomes included stroke, hospitalizations for stroke, and death resulting from stroke (as recorded on death certificates). Results: The study cohort included 79 844 AF patients followed for an average of 4 years (average of 2.4 years up to the start of warfarin therapy). All risk schemes had modest discriminatory ability in AF patients, with c‐statistics for predicting events ranging from 0.55 to 0.69 for strokes recorded by the general practitioner or in hospital, from 0.56 to 0.69 for stroke hospitalizations, and from 0.56 to 0.78 for death resulting from stroke as reported on death certificates. The proportion of patients assigned to individual risk categories varied widely across the schemes, with the proportion categorized as moderate risk ranging from 12.7% (CHA₂DS₂‐VASc) to 61.5% (modified CHADS₂). Low‐risk subjects were truly low risk (with annual stroke events < 0.5%) with the modified CHADS₂, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and CHA₂DS₂‐VASc schemes. Conclusion: Current published risk schemes have modest predictive value for stroke. A new scheme (CHA₂DS₂‐VASc) may discriminate those at truly low risk and minimize classification of subjects as intermediate/moderate risk. This approach would simplify our approach to stroke risk stratification and improve decision‐making for thromboprophylaxis in patients with AF.

Italy has been the first-hit European country to face the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Aim of this survey was to assess in depth the impact of the outbreak on healthcare workers (HCW). A 40-item online survey was disseminated via social media inviting Italian HCW, with questions exploring demographics, health status and work environment of respondents. A total of 527 were invited to take part in March 2020, of whom 74% (n = 388) responded to the survey. Of these, 235 (61%) were women. HCW were mostly physicians (74%), from high-prevalence regions (52%). 25% experienced typical symptoms during the last 14 days prior to survey completion, with only 45% of them being tested for COVID-19. Among the tested population, 18 (18%) resulted positive for COVID-19, with 33% being asymptomatic. Only 22% of HCW considered personal protective equipment adequate for quality and quantity. Females and respondents working in high-risk sectors were more likely to rate psychological support as useful (OR, 1.78 [CI 95% 1.14–2.78] P = 0.012, and 2.02 [1.12–3.65] P = 0.020, respectively) and workload as increased (mean increase, 0.38 [0.06–0.69] P = 0.018; and 0.54 [0.16–0.92] P = 0.005, respectively). The insights from this survey may help authorities in countries where COVID-19 epidemic has not yet broken out. Management strategies should be promptly undertaken in order to enhance safety and optimise resource allocation.