The purpose of this study was to systematically review the development, performance, and applicability of prognostic models developed for predicting poor events in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Databases including Embase, PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang, Wei Pu, and China Biological Medicine were queried from their respective dates of inception to 1 June 2023, to examine multivariate models for prognostic prediction in HFpEF. Both forward and backward citations of all studies were included in our analysis. Two researchers individually used the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist to extract data and assess the quality of the models using the Predictive Mode Bias Risk Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Among the 6897 studies screened, 16 studies derived and/or validated a total of 39 prognostic models. The sample size ranges for model development, internal validation, and external validation are 119 to 5988, 152 to 1000, and 30 to 5957, respectively. The most frequently employed modelling technique was Cox proportional hazards regression. Six studies (37.50%) conducted internal validation of models; bootstrap and k-fold cross-validation were the commonly used methods for internal validation of models. Ten of these models (25.64%) were validated externally, with reported the c-statistic in the external validation set ranging from 0.70 to 0.96, while the remaining models await external validation. The MEDIA echo score and I-PRESERVE-sudden cardiac death prediction mode have been externally validated using multiple cohorts, and the results consistently show good predictive performance. The most frequently used predictors identified among the models were age, n-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, ejection fraction, albumin, and hospital stay in the last 5 months owing to heart failure. All study predictor domains and outcome domains were at low risk of bias, high or unclear risk of bias of all prognostic models due to underreporting in the area of analysis. All studies did not evaluate the clinical utility of the prognostic models. Predictive models for predicting prognostic outcomes in patients with HFpEF showed good discriminatory ability but their utility and generalization remain uncertain due to the risk of bias, differences in predictors between models, and the lack of clinical application studies. Future studies should improve the methodological quality of model development and conduct external validation of models.

Objectives: This study aimed to systematically develop a nurse-led complex intervention to enhance the quality of and adherence to home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) care for patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The intervention integrated stakeholder perspectives, expert insights, empirical evidence, and theoretical frameworks.Methods: We initially searched for initial cardiac rehabilitation strategies based on the “Behavior Change Wheel” model and literature review. The Delphi method was used in three rounds of consultations. The guidelines for the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi studies were also followed. The Delphi panel consisted of 15 experts in rehabilitation medicine, clinical medicine, cardiovascular nursing, behavioral science, community nursing, geriatric nursing, and nursing management from various provinces and cities in China. Panelists were asked to rate the effectiveness of HBCR strategies on a 5-point Likert scale.Results: A questionnaire was sent to the members of the expert panel via email. The consensus from 15 experts led to the development of a framework in round 3. The response rates for the three rounds were 88.23, 100.00, and 100.00%, respectively. The expert authority coefficients for all rounds were 0.95. The Kendall coefficients obtained in the three rounds were 0.09, 0.78, and 0.87, respectively.Conclusion: A set of strategies was developed for a comprehensive HBCR program for patients with TAVR, which can provide practical methods for relevant government departments, healthcare professionals, and patients’ families. Future research should investigate the experiences of stakeholders and assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing these strategies.

This study aimed to evaluate the measurement properties and methodological quality of assessment tools for Kinesophobia among patients with cardiovascular disease and provide a reference for healthcare professionals in selecting high-quality assessment tools. A systematic search was performed on specific databases: Embase, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, China Biological Medicine disc, CINAHL, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, from inception to April 1, 2023. The researchers retrieved studies on the measurement attributes of the exercise fear scale in patients with cardiovascular diseases. They also traced back the references of the included studies to supplement relevant literature. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, screening and data extraction were independently undertaken by two reviewers. Two researchers individually used the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias Checklist to assess the methodological quality of the scale, applied the COSMIN criteria to evaluate the measurement properties of the scale, and used a modified Grading, Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to assess the certainty of evidence. Seventeen studies were identified that reported the psychometric properties of six patient reported outcome measurement tools (included different languages version) The methodological quality of content validity was adequate in only two studies, the remaining patient-reported outcome measures demonstrated doubtful content validity. Limited information on cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance, measurement error, and responsiveness was retrieved. The Swedish version and the Chinese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart were graded “A.” The remaining instruments were graded “B.” The methodological and measurement attributes of the Swedish and Chinese versions of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart are relatively high quality and can be tentatively recommended. The measurement properties of the remaining scales remain to be verified.