Evaluation of the efficiency of at least 24-hour observation of transition to oral diuretic therapy before discharge on 30-day outcomes in acute heart failure patients: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (AHF) patients face high risks of readmission and mortality post-discharge. Transitioning from intravenous (IV) to oral (PO) diuretics before discharge is recommended to improve patient stability. However, the effectiveness of a prolonged observation period on oral diuretics (> 24 h) before discharge is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of an extended (at least 24 h) oral diuretic response observation period prior to discharge on 30-day outcomes, including mortality, rehospitalization, and length of stay in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane, up to November 2024. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024608663). Seven retrospective observational studies involving 14,417 AHF patients were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was applied to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: The meta-analysis found no significant reduction in mortality (OR: 0.85; 95% CI [0.53-1.36]) or heart failure re-admissions (OR: 0.99; 95% CI[0.93-1.05]) for patients observed for at least 24 h after oral diuretic transition compared to those with shorter or no observation. All-cause readmission outcomes also showed no significant difference (OR: 1.02; 95% CI [0.71-1.47]). However, a longer LOS was observed in patients with extended observation (mean difference: 2.14 days; 95% CI [1.26-3.03]). CONCLUSION: Extended, at least 24-hour observation after the transition to oral diuretics therapy was significantly associated with an increased LOS but not an improvement in 30-day mortality or readmission rates in AHF patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".