9.2.3.1.3 High risk, Short, Nurse-led or pharmacist-led clinic No studies were identified in this category. 9.2.3.1.4 High risk, Short, Case-management No studies were identified in this category. 9.2.3.1.5 High risk, Mid-length, Home-based MDT Table 105: Clinical evidence summary: PREFER (Brannstrom 2014): Mid-length Home-based MDT (MDThome) vs Primary +/- secondary care for high risk HF Outcomes No of Participant s (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with primary +/- secondary care Risk difference with MDThome HIGH rate ratio (from 736 fewer to 1237 fewer)a Referral and approach to care Chronic Heart Failure NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. ISBN: Outcomes No of Participant s (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with primary +/- secondary care Risk difference with MDThome LOWb due to imprecision (from 38 fewer to 562 more) Quality of life EQ-5D final score (appears to be EQ-5D visual analogue scale), higher=better. Scale from: 0 to 100. VERY LOWb, c due to risk of bias, imprecision The mean quality of life in the control groups was The mean quality of life in the intervention groups was 8.1 higher (better) (2.03 lower to 18.23 higher) (a) Manually calculated as Risk Difference above 1000. (b) Downgraded by one increment as confidence interval crossed 1 MID or 2 increments as confidence interval crossed both MIDs. (c) Downgraded by 1 increment if the majority of the evidence was at high risk of bias, and downgraded by 2 increments if the majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias. 