{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02699055330634278, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001349527665317139, 'mean_word_length': 5.235294117647059, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Long‐term follow‐up in optimally treated and stable heart failure patients: primary care vs. heart failure clinic. Results of the COACH‐2 study

It has been suggested that home‐based heart failure (HF) management in primary care may be an alternative to clinic‐based management in HF patients. However, little is known about adherence to HF guidelines and adherence to the medication regimen in these home‐based programmes. The aim of the current study was to determine whether long‐term follow‐up and treatment in primary care is equally effective as follow‐up at a specialized HF clinic in terms of guideline adherence and patient adherence, in HF patients initially managed and up‐titrated to optimal treatment at a specialized HF clinic.