Health outcomes in decompensated congestive heart failure: a comparison of tertiary hospitals in Brazil and United States

Background Few international studies prospectively compared evidence-based practices and health outcomes among congestive heart failure (CHF) cohorts from countries with different cultural and economic backgrounds. Methods Patients consecutively admitted with congestive heart failure to tertiary care teaching hospitals in Brazil and in the United States (U.S.) were systematically evaluated using a structured data form. Follow-up data 3 months after discharge were obtained using chart review and telephone interviews. Results U.S. patients were older (p<0.01), had higher prevalence of ischemic etiology (p<0.01) and less previous hospitalizations for congestive heart failure (p=0.03) than Brazilian patients, but similar Charlson comorbidity scores (p=0.54) and left ventricular (LV) function (p=0.45). Prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors at discharge was lower at the U.S. hospital (57% vs. 68%; p=0.03), but beta-blockers prescription was higher (37% vs. 10%; p<0.01). Length-of-stay was significantly shorter (5 [interquartile range, 3–9] vs. 11 [6–19] days; p<0.001) and in-hospital mortality was lower (2.4% vs. 13%; p<0.001) in the U.S. cohort, but fewer clinical events within 3 months after discharge were observed in Brazilian patients (42% vs. 54%; p=0.02). Combined clinical outcomes within 3 months, including overall mortality and hospital readmission, were similar between cohorts (57% vs. 55%; p=0.80). In multivariate analysis, hospital site remained significantly associated with health outcomes. Conclusions Medical practice and health-related outcomes were different between U.S. and Brazilian congestive heart failure patients. In order to improve management worldwide, potential factors (structural, cultural or disease-related) that might be associated with these differences need to be evaluated in future studies.