Objective:To monitor the effects of intervention and management on the quality of life and the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic heart failure in the community setting.Methods:Based on questionnaire data, 200 patients with chronic heart failure in the community were randomly divided into an observation group and a control group, with 100 cases in each group.The control group was followed up for routine health information collection at home, while the observation group received standardized community intervention for patients with chronic heart failure.The awareness rate of heart failure, rate of patients receiving drug treatment, rate of standardized drug utilization, cardiac function, satisfaction with quality of life and incidence of cardiovascular events were compared between the two groups.Results:Scientific intervention for community-dwelling patients with chronic heart failure was able to significantly improve standardized drug usage and quality of life( P<0.05).Compared with the control group, patients in the observation group showed a significantly lower probability of cardiovascular events and more favorable results measured with parameters such as blood pressure, blood glucose and heart rate after intervention.Especially noteworthy was that the effective control rate of blood pressure in the observation group reached 72.4%, which was much higher than 45.9% in the control group( χ2=14.543, P<0.05), the effective control rate of blood glucose in the observation group reached 69.4%, which was much higher than 32.7% in the control group( χ2=12.588, P<0.05), and the effective control rate of heart rate in the observation group(80.6%)was much higher than in the control group(53.1%)( χ2=13.137, P<0.05).The observation group also had better results than the control group in quitting smoking, eating a low-salt, low-fat diet, and regularly measuring blood pressure, blood glucose and body fat percentage.The MNLF score in the control group(31.21±3.01)was higher than that in the observation group(22.66±2.87), and the difference was statistically significant( t=7.26, P<0.05).The LiHFe score in the control group(39.85±6.09)was lower than that in the observation group(71.36±4.32), and the difference was statistically significant( t=18.44, P<0.05).The observation group had lower readmission frequency(46.9% vs.29.6%)and incidence of cardiovascular events(56.1% vs.31.6%)than the control group and the difference was statistically significant( χ2=12.64, 15.01, both P<0.05). Conclusions:The establishment of community intervention and management for patients with chronic heart failure can significantly improve the awareness rate of heart failure, rate of drug treatment, rate of standardized drug usage, self-management ability and quality of life, and reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events.The practice should be promoted in communities.

Objective To systematically review the risk prediction models for postoperative pancreatic fistula(POPF)after pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD),and to provide a reference for the clinical screening and application of POPF-related risk models.Methods This study was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines,with a PROSPERO registration number of CRD42023437672.PubMed,Scopus,Embase,Web of Science,the Cochrane Library,CNKI,VIP,Wanfang Data,China Medical Journal Full-text Database,and CBM were searched for studies on establishing risk prediction models for POPF after PD published up to April 26,2024.The PROBAST tool was used to assess the quality of articles,and RevMan 5.4 and MedCalc were used to perform the Meta-analysis.Results A total of 36 studies were included,involving 20 119 in total,and the incidence rate of POPF after PD was 7.4%—47.8%.A total of 55 risk prediction models were established in the 36 articles,with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve(AUC)of 0.690-0.952,among which 52 models had an AUC of>0.7.The quality assessment of the articles showed high risk of bias and good applicability.MedCalc was used to perform a statistical analysis of AUC values,and the results showed a pooled AUC of 0.833(95%confidence interval:0.808-0.857).The Meta-analysis showed that body mass index,amylase in drainage fluid on the first day after surgery,preoperative serum albumin,pancreatic duct diameter,pancreatic texture,fat score,tumor location,blood loss,sex,time of operation,main pancreatic duct index,and pancreatic CT value were predictive factors for POPF(all P<0.05).Conclusion The risk prediction models for POPF after PD is still in the exploratory stage.There is a lack of calibration methods and internal validation for most prediction models,and only the univariate analysis is used to for the screening of variables,which leads to the high risk of bias.In the future,it is necessary to improve the methods for model establishment,so as to develop risk prediction models with a higher prediction accuracy.

Objective To systematically evaluate the risk prediction models for anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients with esophageal cancer after surgery. Methods A computer-based search of PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese Medical Journal Full-text Database, VIP, Wanfang, SinoMed and CNKI was conducted to collect studies on postoperative AL risk prediction model for esophageal cancer from their inception to October 1st, 2023. PROBAST tool was employed to evaluate the bias risk and applicability of the model, and Stata 15 software was utilized for meta-analysis. Results A total of 19 literatures were included covering 25 AL risk prediction models and 7373 patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.670-0.960. Among them, 23 prediction models had a good prediction performance (AUC>0.7); 13 models were tested for calibration of the model; 1 model was externally validated, and 10 models were internally validated. Meta-analysis showed that hypoproteinemia (OR=9.362), postoperative pulmonary complications (OR=7.427), poor incision healing (OR=5.330), anastomosis type (OR=2.965), preoperative history of thoracoabdominal surgery (OR=3.181), preoperative diabetes mellitus (OR=2.445), preoperative cardiovascular disease (OR=3.260), preoperative neoadjuvant therapy (OR=2.977), preoperative respiratory disease (OR=4.744), surgery method (OR=4.312), American Society of Anesthesiologists score (OR=2.424) were predictors for AL after esophageal cancer surgery. Conclusion At present, the prediction model of AL risk in patients with esophageal cancer after surgery is in the development stage, and the overall research quality needs to be improved.