Use of Optimal Medical Therapy in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease Undergoing Cardiac Rehabilitation.

Optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or heart failure (HF) is underused despite the established benefits of these medications. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) may be one place where OMT could be promoted. We sought to describe the prevalence and characteristics of OMT use in patients with CAD or HF undergoing CR. We included patients with CAD (myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, angina) and HF enrolled in our CR program. For patients with CAD, we defined OMT to consist of aspirin or other antiplatelets, statins, and beta-blockers (BB). For patients with HF or EF ≤ 40%, OMT included BB, spironolactone, and either Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). For CAD patients with normal EF, OMT also included ACEi/ARB/ARNI if they also had diabetes type 2. From January 2015 to December 2019, 828 patients were referred to CR and 743 attended. Among 612 patients (mean age: 65, 23% female) with CAD, 483 (79%) patients were on OMT. Of the 131 HF patients (mean age: 64, 21% female) enrolled in CR, only 23 (18%) met all 3 OMT criteria, whereas most patients were on only 1 (93 %) or 2 (76%) HF specific medications. Spironolactone was the least prescribed (22%) medication. Over the study period, we observed a steady increase in the use of ARNI (2015: 0% vs 2019: 27%, p < 0.01). Among the individuals, 69 patients experienced both CAD and HF, while only 7 patients were under OMT for both CAD and HF. Most patients attending CR with CAD are receiving OMT, but most patients with HF are not. Although OMT has improved over time, there remains room for improvement, particularly among patients with HF.

Program Directors Survey on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cardiology Fellowship Training.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed unprecedented changes to medical education, including CV fellowship programs. CV fellowship PDs offer a unique perspective regarding the impact of the pandemic on CV medical education. Objectives: The 4th annual Cardiovascular Diseases (CV) Fellowship Program Directors (PDs) Survey sought to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CV fellows and fellowship programs. Methods: The survey contained 31 items examining the clinical, educational, and academic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on CV fellowship programs. Results: Survey response rate was 54%. Most respondents (58%) represented university-based programs. Most PDs felt that changes to clinical practice during the COVID-19 negatively impacted fellow education in cardiac catheterization (66%), outpatient cardiology (52%), nuclear imaging (51%), and echocardiography (50%). Despite improving attendance, 75% of PDs felt that virtual educational conferences adversely impacted interaction between participants. Only 22% felt they improved fellow education. Most PDs (85%) reported a negative impact of the pandemic on fellow well-being and burnout, and 57% reported a decrease in research productivity among fellows. Even though virtual recruitment allowed programs to interview more competitive candidates, most PDs felt that virtual interviews adversely impacted interactions between their fellows and candidates (71%) and their ability to convey the culture of their program (60%). Conclusions: Most CV fellowship PDs felt the COVID-19 pandemic brought changes that negatively impacted the clinical training, didactic learning, academic productivity, and well-being among cardiology fellows. The implications of these changes on the competency of cardiologists that trained during the COVID-19 pandemic deserve future study.