Integrating Cost into Shared Decision-Making for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (POCKET-COST-HF): A Trial Providing Out-of-Pocket Costs for Heart Failure Medications during Clinical Encounters.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) often entails substantial out-of-pocket costs that can vary appreciably between patients. This has raised concerns regarding financial toxicity, equity, and adherence to medical therapy. In spite of these concerns, cost discussions in the HFrEF population appear to be rare, partly because out-of-pocket costs are generally unavailable during clinical encounters. In this trial, out-of-pocket cost information is given to patients and clinicians during outpatient encounters with the aim to assess the impact of providing this information on medication discussions and decisions. HYPOTHESIS: Cost-informed decision-making will be facilitated by providing access to patient-specific out-of-pocket cost estimates at the time of clinical encounter. DESIGN: Integrating Cost into Shared Decision-Making for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (POCKET-COST-HF) is a multicenter trial based at Emory Healthcare and University of Colorado Health. Adapting an existing patient activation tool from the EPIC-HF trial, patients and clinicians are presented a checklist with medications approved for treatment of HFrEF with or without patient-specific out-of-pocket costs (obtained from a financial navigation firm). Clinical encounters are audio-recorded, and patients are surveyed about their experience. The trial utilizes a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, allowing for each site to enroll control and intervention group patients while minimizing contamination of the control arm. DISCUSSION: This trial will elucidate the potential impact of robust cost disclosure efforts and key information regarding patient and clinician perspectives related to cost and cost communication. It also will reveal important challenges associated with providing out-of-pocket costs for medications during clinical encounters. Acquiring medication costs for this trial requires an involved process and outsourcing of work. In addition, costs may change throughout the year, raising questions regarding what specific information is most valuable. These data will represent an important step towards understanding the role of integrating cost discussions into heart failure care. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04793880.

Cognitive Impairment in Heart Failure: A Heart Failure Society of America Scientific Statement.

Cognitive impairment is common among adults with heart failure (HF), as both diseases are strongly related to advancing age and multimorbidity (including both cardiovascular and noncardiovascular conditions). Moreover, HF itself can contribute to alterations in the brain. Cognition is critical for a myriad of self-care activities that are necessary to manage HF, and it also has a major impact on prognosis; consequently, cognitive impairment has important implications for self-care, medication management, function and independence, and life expectancy. Attuned clinicians caring for patients with HF can identify clinical clues present at medical encounters that suggest cognitive impairment. When present, screening tests such as the Mini-Cog, and consideration of referral for comprehensive neurocognitive testing may be indicated. Management of cognitive impairment should focus on treatment of underlying causes of and contributors to cognitive impairment, medication management/optimization, and accommodation of deficiencies in self-care. Given its implications on care, it is important to integrate cognitive impairment into clinical decision making. Although gaps in knowledge and challenges to implementation exist, this scientific statement is intended to guide clinicians in caring for and meeting the needs of an increasingly complex and growing subpopulation of patients with HF.

Clinician Insights into Effective Components, Delivery Characteristics, and Implementation Strategies of Ambulatory Palliative Care for People with Heart Failure: A Qualitative Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit perspectives from specialist palliative care (SPC) and cardiology clinicians on the necessary components, delivery characteristics, and implementation strategies of successful ambulatory SPC for people with heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND: Palliative care is a recommended component of guideline-directed care for people with HF. However, optimal strategies to implement SPC within ambulatory settings are unknown. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study comprised of semi-structured interviews with SPC and cardiology clinicians at Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) with the highest number of ambulatory SPC consultations within the VA system among people with HF from 2021-2022. Clinicians were asked how they provided ambulatory SPC and what they felt were the necessary components, delivery characteristics, and implementation strategies of care delivery. Interviews were analyzed using directed content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 14 SPC clinicians and 9 cardiology clinicians at seven national VAMCs; 43% were physicians and 48% were advanced practice registered nurses/physician associates. Essential components of ambulatory SPC encompassed discussion of goals of care (e.g., prognosis, advance directives) and connecting patients/caregivers to resources (e.g., homecare). Preferred delivery characteristics included integrated (i.e., embedded) approaches to SPC delivery, standardized patient selection and referral procedures, and formalized procedures for handoffs to and from SPC. Strategies that addressed SPC implementation included deploying palliative champions, educating non-SPC clinicians on the value of ambulatory SPC for people with HF, and developing ambulatory models through leadership support. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Facilitating the broader adoption of ambulatory SPC among people with HF may be achieved by prioritizing these mutually valued and necessary features of SPC delivery.

Remote Follow-up in a Heart Failure Pragmatic Trial: Insights From the CONNECT-HF.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials typically require study-specific visits, which can burden participants and sites. Remote follow-up, such as centralized call centers for participant-reported or site-reported, holds promise for reducing costs and enhancing the pragmatism of trials. In this secondary analysis of the CONNECT-HF (Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement For HF) trial, we aimed to evaluate the completeness and validity of the remote follow-up process. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CONNECT-HF trial evaluated the effect of a post-discharge quality-improvement intervention for heart failure compared to usual care for up to 1 year. Suspected events were reported either by participants or by health care proxies through a centralized call center or by sites through medical-record queries. When potential hospitalization events were suspected, additional medical records were collected and adjudicated. Among 5942 potential hospitalizations, 18% were only participant-reported, 28% were reported by both participants and sites, and 50% were only site-reported. Concordance rates between the participant/site reports and adjudication for hospitalization were high: 87% participant-reported, 86% both, and 86% site-reported. Rates of adjudicated heart failure hospitalization events among adjudicated all-cause hospitalization were lower but also consistent: 45% participant-reported, 50% both, and 50% site-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Participant-only and site-only reports missed a substantial number of hospitalization events. We observed similar concordance between participant/site reports and adjudication for hospitalizations. Combining participant-reported and site-reported outcomes data is important to capture and validate hospitalizations effectively in pragmatic heart failure trials.

Bias in team decision-making for advanced heart failure therapies: model application.

Bias in advanced heart failure therapy allocation results in inequitable outcomes for minoritized populations. The purpose of this study was to examine how bias is introduced during group decision-making with an interprofessional team using Breathett's Model of Heart Failure Decision-Making. This was a secondary qualitative descriptive analysis from a study focused on bias in advanced heart failure therapy allocation. Team meetings were recorded and transcribed from four heart failure centers. Breathett's Model was applied both deductively and inductively to transcripts (n = 12). Bias was identified during discussions about patient characteristics, clinical fragility, and prior clinical decision-making. Some patients were labeled as "good citizens" or as adherent/non-adherent while others benefited from strong advocacy from interprofessional team members. Social determinants of health also impacted therapy allocation. Interprofessional collaboration with advanced heart failure therapy allocation may be enhanced with the inclusion of patient advocates and limit of clinical decision-making using subjective data.

Sex-disparities in chest pain workup: a retrospective cohort review of a university based clinical decision pathway.

BACKGROUND: Females have historically lower rates of cardiovascular testing when compared to males. Clinical decision pathways (CDP) that utilize standardized risk-stratification methods may balance this disparity. We sought to determine whether clinical decision pathways could minimize sex-based differences in the non-invasive workup of chest pain in the emergency department (ED). Moreover, we evaluated whether the HEART score would minimize sex-based differences in risk-stratification. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort review of adult ED encounters for chest pain where CDP was employed. Primary outcome was any occurrence of non-invasive imaging (coronary CTA, stress imaging), invasive testing, intervention (PCI or CABG), or death. Secondary outcomes were 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE). We stratified HEART scores and primary/secondary outcomes by sex. RESULTS: A total of 1078 charts met criteria for review. Mean age at presentation was 59 years. Females represented 47% of the population. Low, intermediate, and high-risk patients as determined by the HEART score were 17%, 65%, and 18% of the population, respectively, without any significant differences between males and females. Non-invasive testing was similar between males and females when stratified by risk. Males categorized as high risk underwent more coronary angiogram (33% vs. 16%, p = 0.01) and PCI (18% vs. 8%, p = 0.04) than high risk females, but this was not seen in patients categorized as low or intermediate risk. Males experienced more MACE than females (8% vs. 3%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We identified no sex-based differences in risk-stratification or non-invasive testing when the CDP was used. High risk males, however, underwent more coronary angiogram and PCI than high risk females, and consequently males experienced more overall MACE than females. This disparity may be explained by sex-based differences in the pathophysiology driving each patient's presentation.

Palliative Care Across the Spectrum of Heart Failure.

Persons with heart failure (HF) often suffer from poor symptom control, decreased quality of life, and poor communication with their health care providers. These needs are particularly acute in advanced HF, a leading cause of death in the United States. Palliative care, when offered alongside HF disease management, offers improved symptom control, quality of life, communication, and caregiver satisfaction as well as reduced caregiver anxiety. The dynamic nature of the clinical trajectory of HF presents distinct symptom patterns, changing functional status, and uncertainty, which requires an adaptive, dynamic model of palliative care delivery. Due to a limited specialty-trained palliative care workforce, patients and their caregivers often cannot access these benefits, especially in the community. To meet these needs, new models are required that are better informed by high-quality data, engage a range of health care providers in primary palliative care principles, and have clear triggers for specialty palliative care engagement, with specific palliative interventions tailored to patient's illness trajectory and changing needs.

Association of multimorbidity with guideline-directed medical therapy intensification in heart failure: Findings from the EPIC-HF trial.

A potential contributor to the suboptimal rates of guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) prescribing for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is the burden of multimorbidity in patients with HFrEF. We examined the effect of multimorbidity on GDMT prescription in the EPIC-HF trial, finding that multimorbidity was associated with decreased likelihood of GDMT intensification. Further study is needed to guide treatment in high-risk, multimorbid patients with HFrEF.

Bundled Payments for Care Improvement and Quality of Care and Outcomes in Heart Failure.

Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program was launched in 2013 with a goal to improve care quality while lowering costs to Medicare. Objective: To compare changes in the quality and outcomes of care for patients hospitalized with heart failure according to hospital participation in the BPCI program. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a difference-in-difference approach to evaluate the BPCI program in 18 BPCI hospitals vs 211 same-state non-BPCI hospitals for various process-of-care measures and outcomes using American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry and CMS Medicare claims data from November 1, 2008, to August 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to May 2023. Exposures: Hospital participation in CMS BPCI Model 2 Heart Failure, which paid hospitals in a fee-for-service process and then shared savings or required reimbursement depending on how the total cost of an episode of care compared with a target price. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points included 7 quality-of-care measures. Secondary end points included 9 outcome measures, including in-hospital mortality and hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day and 90-day all-cause readmission rate and mortality rate. Results: During the study period, 8721 patients were hospitalized in the 23 BPCI hospitals and 94 530 patients were hospitalized in the 224 same-state non-BPCI hospitals. Less than a third of patients (30 723 patients, 29.8%) were 75 years or younger; 54 629 (52.9%) were female, and 48 622 (47.1%) were male. Hospital participation in BPCI Model 2 was not associated with significant differential changes in the odds of various process-of-care measures, except for a decreased odds of evidence-based ß-blocker at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.98; P = .04). Participation in the BPCI was not associated with a significant differential change in the odds of receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors at discharge, receiving an aldosterone antagonist at discharge, having a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)-defibrillator or CRT pacemaker placed or prescribed at discharge, having implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) counseling or an ICD placed or prescribed at discharge, heart failure education being provided among eligible patients, or having a follow-up visit within 7 days or less. Participation in the BPCI was associated with a significant decrease in odds of in-hospital mortality (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86; P = .002). Participation was not associated with a significant differential change in hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day or 90-day all-cause readmission rate and 30-day or 90-day all-cause mortality rate. Conclusion and Relevance: In this study, hospital participation in the BPCI Model 2 Heart Failure program was not associated with improvement in process-of-care quality measures or 30-day or 90-day risk-adjusted all-cause mortality and readmission rates.

Eligibility and Projected Benefits of Rapid Initiation of Quadruple Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: U.S. nationwide estimates of the proportion of patients newly diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the associated benefits of rapid implementation, are not well characterized. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to characterize the degree to which patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF are eligible for quadruple medical therapy, and the projected benefits of in-hospital initiation. METHODS: Among patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2023, eligibility criteria based on regulatory labeling, guidelines, and expert consensus documents were applied for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapies. Of those eligible, the projected effect of quadruple therapy on 12-month mortality was modeled using treatment effects from pivotal clinical trials utilized by the AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure, and compared with observed outcomes among patients treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blockers. RESULTS: Of 33,036 patients newly diagnosed with HFrEF, 27,158 (82%) were eligible for quadruple therapy, and 30,613 (93%) were eligible for ≥3 components. From 2021 to 2023, of patients eligible for quadruple therapy, 15.3% were prescribed quadruple therapy and 41.5% were prescribed triple therapy. Among Medicare beneficiaries eligible for quadruple therapy, 12-month incidence of mortality was 24.7% and HF hospitalization was 22.2%. Applying the relative risk reductions in clinical trials, complete implementation of quadruple therapy by time of discharge was projected to yield absolute risk reductions in 12-month mortality of 10.4% (number needed to treat = 10) compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and beta-blocker, and 24.8% (number needed to treat = 4) compared with no GDMT. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide U.S. cohort of patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed HFrEF, >4 of 5 patients were projected as eligible for quadruple therapy at discharge; yet, <1 in 6 were prescribed it. If clinical trial benefits can be fully realized, in-hospital initiation of quadruple medical therapy for newly diagnosed HFrEF would yield large absolute reductions in mortality.

A Phenomapping Tool and Clinical Score to Identify Low Diuretic Efficiency in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) have a varying response to diuretic therapy. Strategies for the early identification of low diuretic efficiency to inform decongestion therapies are lacking. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to develop and externally validate a machine learning-based phenomapping approach and integer-based diuresis score to identify patients with low diuretic efficiency. METHODS: Participants with ADHF from ROSE-AHF, CARRESS-HF, and ATHENA-HF were pooled in the derivation cohort (n = 794). Multivariable finite-mixture model-based phenomapping was performed to identify phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency (urine output over the first 72 hours per total intravenous furosemide equivalent loop diuretic dose). Phenogroups were externally validated in other pooled ADHF trials (DOSE/ESCAPE). An integer-based diuresis score (BAN-ADHF score: blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, natriuretic peptide levels, atrial fibrillation, diastolic blood pressure, hypertension and home diuretic, and heart failure hospitalization) was developed and validated based on predictors of the diuretic efficiency phenogroups to estimate the probability of low diuretic efficiency using the pooled ADHF trials described earlier. The associations of the BAN-ADHF score with markers and symptoms of congestion, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and global well-being were assessed using adjusted regression models. RESULTS: Clustering identified 3 phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency: phenogroup 1 (n = 370; 47%) had lower diuretic efficiency (median: 13.1 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 7.7-19.4 mL/mg) than phenogroups 2 (n = 290; 37%) and 3 (n = 134; 17%) (median: 17.8 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 10.8-26.1 mL/mg and median: 35.3 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 17.5-49.0 mL/mg, respectively) (P < 0.001). The median urine output difference in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide between the lowest and highest diuretic efficiency group (phenogroup 1 vs 3) was 3,520 mL/d. The BAN-ADHF score demonstrated good model performance for predicting the lowest diuretic efficiency phenogroup membership (C-index: 0.92 in DOSE/ESCAPE validation cohort) that was superior to measures of kidney function (creatinine or blood urea nitrogen), natriuretic peptide levels, or home diuretic dose (DeLong P < 0.001 for all). Net urine output in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide among patients with a low vs high (5 vs 20) BAN-ADHF score was 2,650 vs 660 mL per 24 hours, respectively. Participants with higher BAN-ADHF scores had significantly lower global well-being, higher natriuretic peptide levels on discharge, a longer in-hospital stay, and a higher risk of in-hospital mortality in both derivation and validation cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed and validated a phenomapping strategy and diuresis score for individuals with ADHF and differential response to diuretic therapy, which was associated with length of stay and mortality.

Implications of Atrial Fibrillation for Guideline-Directed Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are common cardiovascular conditions that frequently coexist. Among patients with HF, more than one-half also have AF. Both are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Moreover, the prevalence of each is increasing globally, and this trend is expected to continue owing to an aging population and increased life expectancy. Diagnosis of AF in a patient with HF is associated with greater symptom burden, more frequent hospitalizations, and a worse prognosis. Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HF can affect the incidence of AF. Once present, AF can influence the efficacy of some components of GDMT for HF. In this review, we discuss the effect of GDMT for HF across the spectrum of ejection fraction on prevention of AF as well as the benefit of GDMT in patients with vs without AF.

Efficient measurement of multiple ventricular assist device patient-reported outcomes: Creation of a 20-item profile from the MCS A-QOL study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures of distinct concepts are often put together into patient profile assessments. When brief, profile assessments can decrease respondent burden and increase measure completion rates. In this report, we describe the creation of 5 self-reported 4-item short forms and the Mechanical Circulatory Support: Measures of Adjustment and Quality of Life (MCS A-QOL) 20-item profile to assess PROs specific to adjustment and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among patients who undergo left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional sample of patients (n = 620) who underwent LVAD implantation at 12 U.S. sites or participated in the MyLVAD.com support group, we created 5 4-item short forms: Satisfaction with Treatment, ventricular assist device (VAD) Team Communication, Being Bothered by VAD Self-care and Limitations, Self-efficacy Regarding VAD self-care, and Stigma, which we combined into a 20-item profile. Analyses included intercorrelations among measures, Cronbach's alpha (i.e., internal consistency reliability)/score-level-specific reliability, and construct validity. RESULTS: The 620 patients were mean age = 57 years, 78% male, 70% White, and 56% on destination therapy LVADs. Intercorrelations among the 5 4-item measures were low to moderate (≤0.50), indicating they are associated yet largely distinct, and correlations with calibrated measures and 6-item short forms were ≥0.76, indicating their ability to reflect full-item bank scores. Internal consistency reliability for the 5 4-item short forms ranged from acceptable (≥0.70) to good (≥0.80). Construct validity was demonstrated for these measures. CONCLUSIONS: Our 5 4-item short forms are reliable and valid and may be used individually or together as a 20-item profile to assess adjustment and HRQOL in patients who undergo LVAD implantation.

Patient control preferences for medical decision making before and after evaluation for left ventricular assist device.

Understanding patients' preferred roles in medical decision making (i.e., passive, collaborative, active) is important to personalized care and patient engagement. Patient control preferences have been described for many treatment decisions, but their stability over time has not been characterized, particularly for major medical events with long-term implications. We prospectively surveyed 233 patients at the initiation of evaluation for a left ventricular assist device, and 1 and 6 months later, including collection of the Control Preferences Scale. Collaborative and active preferences were most common initially, followed by a shift towards more active. Approximately half of patients reported a different control preference in follow up. Patients with higher income and education levels were more likely to prefer an active role. These findings suggest that most patients want to be engaged in shared decision making, but to what degree is varied, can change over time, and is influenced by social determinants of health.