Hospital Heart Failure Medical Therapy Score and Associated Clinical Outcomes and Costs.

Importance: A composite score for guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure (HF) is associated with increased survival. Whether hospital performance according to a GDMT score is associated with a broader array of clinical outcomes at lower costs is unknown. Objectives: To evaluate hospital variability in GDMT score at discharge, 90-day risk-standardized clinical outcomes and costs, and associations between hospital GDMT score and clinical outcomes and costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2015 to September 2019. Included for analysis were patients hospitalized for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry, a national hospital-based quality improvement registry. Study data were analyzed from July 2022 to April 2023. Exposures: GDMT score at discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital variability in GDMT score, a weighted index from 0 to 1 of GDMT prescribed divided by the number of medications eligible, at discharge was evaluated using a generalized linear mixed model using the hospital as a random effect and quantified with the adjusted median odds ratio (AMOR). Parallel analyses centering on 90-day mortality, HF rehospitalization, mortality or HF rehospitalization, home time, and costs were performed. Costs were assessed from the perspective of the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services. Associations between hospital GDMT score and clinical outcomes and costs were evaluated using Spearman coefficients. Results: Among 41 161 patients (median [IQR] age, 78 [71-85] years; 25 546 male [62.1%]) across 360 hospitals, there was significant hospital variability in GDMT score at discharge (AMOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.21-1.26), clinical outcomes (mortality AMOR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.14-1.24; HF rehospitalization AMOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.18-1.27; mortality or HF rehospitalization AMOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.18-1.26; home time AMOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.06-1.10) and costs (AMOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.21-1.26). Higher hospital GDMT score was associated with lower hospital mortality (Spearman ρ, -0.22; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.12; P < .001), lower mortality or HF rehospitalization (Spearman ρ, -0.17; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.06; P = .002), more home time (Spearman ρ, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.24; P = .01), and lower cost (Spearman ρ, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.21 to 0; P = .047) but not with HF rehospitalization (Spearman ρ, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0; P = .06). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study reveal that hospital variability in GDMT score, clinical outcomes, and costs was significant. Higher GDMT score at discharge was associated with lower mortality, lower mortality or hospitalization, more home time, and lower cost. Efforts to increase health care value should include GDMT optimization.

Inpatient Use of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy During Heart Failure Hospitalizations Among Community-Based Health Systems.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains underused. Acute heart failure (HF) hospitalization represents a critical opportunity for rapid initiation of evidence-based medications. However, data on GDMT use at discharge are mostly derived from national quality improvement registries. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe contemporary GDMT use patterns across HF hospitalizations at community-based health systems. METHODS: The authors identified HF hospitalizations from 2016 to 2022 in a U.S. database aggregating deidentified electronic health record data from more than 30 health systems. In-hospital and discharge rates of GDMT use were reported for eligible HFrEF patients. Factors associated with inpatient GDMT use and predischarge discontinuation were evaluated with the use of multivariable models. RESULTS: A total of 20,387 HF hospitalizations among 13,729 HFrEF patients were identified. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists were administered during 70%, 86%, and 37% of eligible hospitalizations, respectively. Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors were used in 17% and 8% of eligible hospitalizations, respectively. Discharge GDMT rates were low. Triple/quadruple therapy was administered in 26% of hospitalizations, falling to 14% on discharge. Predischarge GDMT discontinuations were associated with inpatient hypotension, hyperkalemia, and worsening renal function, but 43%-57% had no medical contraindications. In adjusted analyses, use of 3 or more GDMT classes was associated with fewer 90-day all-cause deaths and HF readmissions compared with less comprehensive GDMT. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient GDMT use in a national analysis of HF hospitalizations was lower than reported in quality improvement registries. High discontinuation rates emphasize an unmet need for inpatient and postdischarge strategies to optimize GDMT use.

Equity in Heart Failure Care: A Get With the Guidelines Analysis of Between- and Within-Hospital Differences in Care by Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Insurance.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in guideline-based quality measures likely contribute to differences in heart failure (HF) outcomes. We evaluated between- and within-hospital differences in the quality of care across sex, race, ethnicity, and insurance for patients hospitalized for HF. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients hospitalized for HF across 596 hospitals in the Get With the Guidelines-HF registry between 2016 and 2021. We evaluated performance across 7 measures stratified by patient sex, race, ethnicity, and insurance. We evaluated differences in performance with and without adjustment for the treating hospital. We also measured variation in hospital-specific disparities. RESULTS: Among 685 227 patients, the median patient age was 72 (interquartile range, 61-82) and 47.2% were women. Measure performance was significantly lower (worse) for women compared with men for all 7 measures before adjustment. For 4 of 7 measures, there were no significant sex-related differences after patient-level adjustment. For 20 of 25 other comparisons, racial and ethnic minorities and Medicaid/uninsured patients had similar or higher (better) adjusted measure performance compared with White and Medicare/privately insured patients, respectively. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor measure performance was significantly lower for Asian, Hispanic, and Medicaid/uninsured patients, and cardiac resynchronization therapy implant/prescription was lower among women and Black patients after hospital adjustment, indicating within-hospital differences. There was hospital-level variation in these differences. For cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation/prescription, 278 hospitals (46.6%) had ≥2% lower implant/prescription for Black versus White patients compared with 109 hospitals (18.3%) with the same or higher cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation/prescription for Black patients. CONCLUSIONS: HF quality measure performance was equitable for most measures. There were within-hospital differences in angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor and cardiac resynchronization therapy implant/prescription for historically marginalized groups. The magnitude of hospital-specific disparities varied across hospitals.

2024 Update to the 2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Performance Measures.

This document describes performance measures for heart failure that are appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs and is meant to serve as a focused update of the "2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures." The new performance measures are taken from the "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines" and are selected from the strongest recommendations (Class 1 or Class 3). In contrast, quality measures may not have as much evidence base and generally comprise metrics that might be useful for clinicians and health care organizations for quality improvement but are not yet appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs. New performance measures include optimal blood pressure control in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the use of guideline-directed medical therapy in hospitalized patients. New quality measures include the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction, the optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy prior to intervention for chronic secondary severe mitral regurgitation, continuation of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure with improved ejection fraction, identifying both known risks for cardiovascular disease and social determinants of health, patient-centered counseling regarding contraception and pregnancy risks for individuals with cardiomyopathy, and the need for a monoclonal protein screen to exclude light chain amyloidosis when interpreting a bone scintigraphy scan assessing for transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis.

2024 Update to the 2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Performance Measures.

This document describes performance measures for heart failure that are appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs and is meant to serve as a focused update of the "2020 ACC/AHA Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures." The new performance measures are taken from the "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines" and are selected from the strongest recommendations (Class 1 or Class 3). In contrast, quality measures may not have as much evidence base and generally comprise metrics that might be useful for clinicians and health care organizations for quality improvement but are not yet appropriate for public reporting or pay-for-performance programs. New performance measures include optimal blood pressure control in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and the use of guideline-directed medical therapy in hospitalized patients. New quality measures include the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction, the optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy prior to intervention for chronic secondary severe mitral regurgitation, continuation of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure with improved ejection fraction, identifying both known risks for cardiovascular disease and social determinants of health, patient-centered counseling regarding contraception and pregnancy risks for individuals with cardiomyopathy, and the need for a monoclonal protein screen to exclude light chain amyloidosis when interpreting a bone scintigraphy scan assessing for transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis.

Artificial intelligence approaches for phenotyping heart failure in U.S. Veterans Health Administration electronic health record.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome with no definitive diagnostic tests. HF registries are often based on manual reviews of medical records of hospitalized HF patients identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. However, most HF patients are not hospitalized, and manual review of big electronic health record (EHR) data is not practical. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has the largest integrated healthcare system in the nation, and an estimated 1.5 million patients have ICD codes for HF (HF ICD-code universe) in their VA EHR. The objective of our study was to develop artificial intelligence (AI) models to phenotype HF in these patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The model development cohort (n = 20 000: training, 16 000; validation 2000; testing, 2000) included 10 000 patients with HF and 10 000 without HF who were matched by age, sex, race, inpatient/outpatient status, hospital, and encounter date (within 60 days). HF status was ascertained by manual chart reviews in VA's External Peer Review Program for HF (EPRP-HF) and non-HF status was ascertained by the absence of ICD codes for HF in VA EHR. Two clinicians annotated 1000 random snippets with HF-related keywords and labelled 436 as HF, which was then used to train and test a natural language processing (NLP) model to classify HF (positive predictive value or PPV, 0.81; sensitivity, 0.77). A machine learning (ML) model using linear support vector machine architecture was trained and tested to classify HF using EPRP-HF as cases (PPV, 0.86; sensitivity, 0.86). From the 'HF ICD-code universe', we randomly selected 200 patients (gold standard cohort) and two clinicians manually adjudicated HF (gold standard HF) in 145 of those patients by chart reviews. We calculated NLP, ML, and NLP + ML scores and used weighted F scores to derive their optimal threshold values for HF classification, which resulted in PPVs of 0.83, 0.77, and 0.85 and sensitivities of 0.86, 0.88, and 0.83, respectively. HF patients classified by the NLP + ML model were characteristically and prognostically similar to those with gold standard HF. All three models performed better than ICD code approaches: one principal hospital discharge diagnosis code for HF (PPV, 0.97; sensitivity, 0.21) or two primary outpatient encounter diagnosis codes for HF (PPV, 0.88; sensitivity, 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that NLP and ML models are efficient AI tools to phenotype HF in big EHR data to create contemporary HF registries for clinical studies of effectiveness, quality improvement, and hypothesis generation.

Equity in the Setting of Heart Failure Diagnosis: An Analysis of Differences Between and Within Clinician Practices.

BACKGROUND: Timely heart failure (HF) diagnosis can lead to earlier intervention and reduced morbidity. Among historically marginalized patients, new-onset HF diagnosis is more likely to occur in acute care settings (emergency department or inpatient hospitalization) than outpatient settings. Whether inequity within outpatient clinician practices affects diagnosis settings is unknown. METHODS: We determined the setting of incident HF diagnosis among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries between 2013 and 2017. We identified sociodemographic and medical characteristics associated with HF diagnosis in the acute care setting. Within each outpatient clinician practice, we compared acute care diagnosis rates across sociodemographic characteristics: female versus male sex, non-Hispanic White versus other racial and ethnic groups, and dual Medicare-Medicaid eligible (a surrogate for low income) versus nondual-eligible patients. Based on within-practice differences in acute diagnosis rates, we stratified clinician practices by equity (high, intermediate, and low) and compared clinician practice characteristics. RESULTS: Among 315 439 Medicare patients with incident HF, 173 121 (54.9%) were first diagnosed in acute care settings. Higher adjusted acute care diagnosis rates were associated with female sex (6.4% [95% CI, 6.1%-6.8%]), American Indian (3.6% [95% CI, 1.1%-6.1%]) race, and dual eligibility (4.1% [95% CI, 3.7%-4.5%]). These differences persisted within clinician practices. With clinician practice adjustment, dual-eligible patients had a 4.9% (95% CI, 4.5%-5.4%) greater acute care diagnosis rate than nondual-eligible patients. Clinician practices with greater equity across dual eligibility also had greater equity across sex and race and ethnicity and were more likely to be composed of predominantly primary care clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in HF diagnosis rates in the acute care setting between and within clinician practices highlight an opportunity to improve equity in diagnosing historically marginalized patients.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of apixaban and rivaroxaban in older patients with atrial fibrillation: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are no clinical trials with a head-to-head comparison between the 2 most commonly used oral anticoagulants (apixaban and rivaroxaban) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The comparative efficacy and safety between these drugs remain unclear, especially in older patients who are at the highest risk for stroke and bleeding. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of major bleeding and thromboembolic events between apixaban and rivaroxaban in older patients with AF. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of all adult patients (66 years or older) with AF in Ontario, Canada, who were treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2020. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, and the primary efficacy outcome was thromboembolic events. Secondary outcomes included any bleeding. Rates and hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted for baseline comorbidities with inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: This study included 42,617 patients with AF treated with apixaban and 30,725 patients treated with rivaroxaban. After inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score, patients in the apixaban and rivaroxaban groups were well balanced for baseline values of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medications; both groups had a similar mean age of 77.4 years, and 49.9% were female. At 1 year, the apixaban group had a lower risk for both major bleeding with an absolute risk reduction at 1 year of 1.1% (2.1% vs 3.2%; HR 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.71]) and any bleeding (8.1% vs 10.9%; HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.69-0.77), with no difference in the risk for thromboembolic events (2.2% vs 2.2%; HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.92-1.13). CONCLUSION: In patients with AF, 66 years or older, treatment with apixaban was associated with lower risk for major bleeding, with no difference in the risk for thromboembolic events compared with rivaroxaban.

Forecasting the Economic Burden of Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke in the United States Through 2050: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the economic burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke over the coming decades may inform policy, health system, and community-level interventions for prevention and treatment. METHODS: We used nationally representative health, economic, and demographic data to project health care costs attributable to key cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia) and conditions (coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation) through 2050. The human capital approach was used to estimate productivity losses from morbidity and premature mortality due to cardiovascular conditions. RESULTS: One in 3 US adults received care for a cardiovascular risk factor or condition in 2020. Annual inflation-adjusted (2022 US dollars) health care costs of cardiovascular risk factors are projected to triple between 2020 and 2050, from $400 billion to $1344 billion. For cardiovascular conditions, annual health care costs are projected to almost quadruple, from $393 billion to $1490 billion, and productivity losses are projected to increase by 54%, from $234 billion to $361 billion. Stroke is projected to account for the largest absolute increase in costs. Large relative increases among the Asian American population (497%) and Hispanic American population (489%) reflect the projected increases in the size of these populations. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of cardiovascular risk factors and overt cardiovascular disease in the United States is projected to increase substantially in the coming decades. Development and deployment of cost-effective programs and policies to promote cardiovascular health are urgently needed to rein in costs and to equitably enhance population health.

Identification and outcomes of KDIGO-defined chronic kidney disease in 1.4 million U.S. Veterans with heart failure.

AIMS: According to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline, the definition of chronic kidney disease (CKD) requires the presence of abnormal kidney structure or function for >3 months with implications for health. CKD in patients with heart failure (HF) has not been defined using this definition, and less is known about the true health implications of CKD in these patients. The objective of the current study was to identify patients with HF who met KDIGO criteria for CKD and examine their outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 1 419 729 Veterans with HF not receiving kidney replacement therapy, 828 744 had data on ≥2 ambulatory serum creatinine >90 days apart. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (n = 185 821) or urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) >30 mg/g (n = 32 730) present twice >3 months apart. Normal kidney function (NKF) was defined as eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2, present for >3 months, without any uACR >30 mg/g (n = 365 963). Patients with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were categorized into four stages: 45-59 (n = 72 606), 30-44 (n = 74 812), 15-29 (n = 32 077), and <15 (n = 6326) ml/min/1.73 m2. Five-year all-cause mortality occurred in 40.4%, 57.8%, 65.6%, 73.3%, 69.7%, and 47.5% of patients with NKF, four eGFR stages, and uACR >30mg/g (albuminuria), respectively. Compared with NKF, hazard ratios (HR) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for all-cause mortality associated with the four eGFR stages and albuminuria were 1.63 (1.62-1.65), 2.00 (1.98-2.02), 2.49 (2.45-2.52), 2.28 (2.21-2.35), and 1.22 (1.20-1.24), respectively. Respective age-adjusted HRs (95% CIs) were 1.13 (1.12-1.14), 1.36 (1.34-1.37), 1.87 (1.84-1.89), 2.24 (2.18-2.31) and 1.19 (1.17-1.21), and multivariable-adjusted HRs (95% CIs) were 1.11 (1.10-1.12), 1.24 (1.22-1.25), 1.46 (1.43-1.48), 1.42 (1.38-1.47), and 1.13 (1.11-1.16). Similar patterns were observed for associations with hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Data needed to define CKD using KDIGO criteria were available in six out of ten patients, and CKD could be defined in seven out of ten patients with data. HF patients with KDIGO-defined CKD had higher risks for poor outcomes, most of which was not explained by abnormal kidney structure or function. Future studies need to examine whether CKD defined using a single eGFR is characteristically and prognostically different from CKD defined using KDIGO criteria.

Kidney Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries After Hospitalization for Heart Failure.

Importance: Kidney health has received increasing focus as part of comprehensive heart failure (HF) treatment efforts. However, the occurrence of clinically relevant kidney outcomes in contemporary populations with HF has not been well studied. Objective: To examine rates of incident dialysis and acute kidney injury (AKI) among Medicare beneficiaries after HF hospitalization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated adults aged 65 years or older who were hospitalized for HF across 372 sites in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry in the US between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. Patients younger than 65 years or requiring dialysis either during or prior to hospitalization were excluded. Data were analyzed from May 4, 2021, to March 8, 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was inpatient dialysis initiation in the year after HF hospitalization and was ascertained via linkage with Medicare claims data. Other all-cause and cause-specific hospitalizations were also evaluated. The covariate-adjusted association between discharge estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and 1-year postdischarge outcomes was examined using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: Overall, among 85 298 patients included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 80 [9] years; 53% women) mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 47% (16%) and mean (SD) eGFR was 53 (29) mL/min per 1.73 m2; 54 010 (63%) had an eGFR less than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2. By 1 year after HF hospitalization, 6% had progressed to dialysis, 7% had progressed to dialysis or end-stage kidney disease, and 7% had been readmitted for AKI. Incident dialysis increased steeply with lower discharge eGFR category: compared with patients with an eGFR of 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or more, individuals with an eGFR of 45 to less than 60 and of less than 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 had higher rates of dialysis readmission (45 to <60: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.16 [95% CI, 1.86-2.51]; <30: AHR, 28.46 [95% CI, 25.25-32.08]). Lower discharge eGFR (per 10 mL/min per 1.73 m2 decrease) was independently associated with a higher rate of readmission for dialysis (AHR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.14-2.32), dialysis or end-stage kidney disease (AHR, 2.34; 95% CI, 2.24-2.44), and AKI (AHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.27), with similar findings for all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, and HF readmission. Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction did not modify the covariate-adjusted association between lower discharge eGFR and kidney outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, older adults with HF had substantial risk of kidney complications, with an estimated 6% progressing to dialysis in the year after HF hospitalization. These findings emphasize the need for health care approaches prioritizing kidney health in this high-risk population.

Cause-Specific Health Care Costs Following Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Cost Offset With SGLT2i Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding differences in cause-specific costs between heart failure (HF) with ejection fraction (EF) ≤40% vs >40%, and potential cost implications of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) therapy. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare cause-specific health care costs following hospitalization for HF with EF ≤40% vs >40% and estimate the cost offset with implementation of SGLT2i therapy. METHODS: This study examined Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for HF in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2016 to 2020. Mean per-patient total (excluding drug costs) and cause-specific costs from discharge through 1-year follow-up were calculated and compared between EF ≤40% vs >40%. Next, risk reductions on total all-cause and HF hospitalizations were estimated in a trial-level meta-analysis of 5 pivotal trials of SGLT2is in HF. Finally, these relative treatment effects were applied to Medicare beneficiaries eligible for SGLT2i therapy to estimate the projected cost offset with implementation of SGLT2i, excluding drug costs. RESULTS: Among 146,003 patients, 50,598 (34.7%) had EF ≤40% and 95,405 (65.3%) had EF >40%. Mean total cost through 1 year was $40,557. Total costs were similar between EF groups overall but were higher for EF ≤40% among patients surviving the 1-year follow-up period. Patients with EF >40% had higher costs caused by non-HF and noncardiovascular hospitalizations, and skilled nursing facilities (all P < 0.001). Trial-level meta-analysis of the 5 SGLT2i clinical trials estimated 11% (rate ratio: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84-0.93; P < 0.001) and 29% (rate ratio: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.66-0.76; P < 0.001) relative reductions in rates of total all-cause and HF hospitalizations, respectively, regardless of EF. Reductions in all-cause and HF hospitalizations were projected to reduce annual costs of readmission by $2,451 to $2,668 per patient with EF ≤40% and $1,439 to $2,410 per patient with EF >40%. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of older U.S. adults hospitalized for HF, cause-specific costs of care differed among patients with EF ≤40% vs >40%. SGLT2i significantly reduced the rate of HF and all-cause hospitalizations irrespective of EF in clinical trials, and implementation of SGLT2i therapy in clinical practice is projected to reduce costs by $1,439 to $2,668 per patient over the 1 year post-discharge, excluding drug costs.

Contemporary American and European Guidelines for Heart Failure Management: JACC: Heart Failure Guideline Comparison.

This review serves to compare contemporary clinical practice recommendations for the management of heart failure (HF), as codified in the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline, the 2022 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) guideline, and the 2023 focused update of the 2021 ESC document. Overall, these guidelines aim to solidify significant advances throughout the HF continuum since the publication of previous full guideline iterations (2013 and 2016 for the ACC/AHA and ESC, respectively). All guidelines provide new recommendations for an increasingly complex landscape of HF care, with focus on primary HF prevention, HF stages, rapid initiation and optimization of evidence-based pharmacotherapies, overlapping cardiac and noncardiac comorbidities, device-based therapies, and management pathways for special groups of patients, including those with cardiac amyloidosis. Importantly, the ACC/AHA/HFSA document features special emphasis on HF risk prediction and screening, cost/value, social determinants of health, and health care disparities. The review discusses major similarities and differences between these recent guidelines and guideline updates, as well as their potential downstream implications for clinical care.

National Trends in Hospital Performance in Guideline-Recommended Pharmacologic Treatment for Heart Failure at Discharge.

BACKGROUND: The use of recommended heart failure (HF) medications has improved over time, but opportunities for improvement persist among women and at rural hospitals. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to characterize national trends in performance in the use of guideline-recommended pharmacologic treatment for HF at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, at which medication copayments are modest. METHODS: Among patients discharged from VA hospitals with HF between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019, receipt of all guideline-recommended HF pharmacotherapy among eligible patients was assessed, consisting of evidence-based beta-blockers; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors; mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists; and oral anticoagulation. RESULTS: Of 55,560 patients at 122 hospitals, 32,304 (58.1%) received all guideline-recommended HF medications for which they were eligible. The proportion of patients receiving all recommended medications was higher in 2019 relative to 2013 (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.44-1.65). The median of hospital performance was 59.1% (Q1-Q3: 53.2%-66.2%), improving with substantial variation across sites from 2013 (median 56.4%; Q1-Q3: 50.0%-62.0%) to 2019 (median 65.7%; Q1-Q3: 56.3%-73.5%). Women were less likely to receive recommended therapies than men (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.74-0.96). Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive recommended therapies (aOR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.79-0.87). Urban hospital location was associated with lower likelihood of medication receipt (aOR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Forty-two percent of patients did not receive all recommended HF medications at discharge, particularly women, minority patients, and those receiving care at urban hospitals. Rates of use increased over time, with variation in performance across hospitals.

Clinical Impact of Routine Assessment of Patient-Reported Health Status in Heart Failure Clinic: The PRO-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of routine clinic use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) has not been well-characterized. We tested if clinic-based use of a disease-specific PRO improves patient-reported quality of life at 1 year. METHODS: The PRO-HF trial (Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic) was an open-label, parallel, patient-level randomized clinical trial of routine PRO assessment or usual care at an academic HF clinic between August 30, 2021, and June 30, 2022, with 1 year of follow-up. In the PRO assessment arm, participants completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) at each HF clinic visit, and results were shared with their treating clinician. The usual care arm completed the KCCQ-12 at randomization and 1 year later, which was not shared with the treating clinician. The primary outcome was the KCCQ-12 overall summary score (OSS) between 12 and 15 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes included domains of the KCCQ-12, hospitalization and emergency department visit rates, HF medication therapy, clinic visit frequency, and testing rates. RESULTS: Across 17 clinicians, 1248 participants were enrolled and randomized to PRO assessment (n=624) or usual care (n=624). The median age was 63.9 years (interquartile range [IQR], 51.8-72.8), 38.9% were women, and the median baseline KCCQ-12 OSS was 82.3 (IQR, 58.3-94.8). Final KCCQ-12 (available in 87.9% of the PRO arm and 85.1% in usual care; P=0.16) median OSS were 87.5 (IQR, 68.8-96.9) in the PRO arm and 87.6 (IQR, 69.7-96.9) in the usual care arm with a baseline-adjusted mean difference of 0.2 ([95% CI, -1.7 to 2.0]; P=0.85). The results were consistent across prespecified subgroups. A post hoc analysis demonstrated a significant interaction with greater benefit among participants with a baseline KCCQ-12 OSS of 60 to 80 but not in less or more symptomatic participants. No significant differences were found in 1-year mortality, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, medication therapy, clinic follow-up, or testing rates between arms. CONCLUSIONS: Routine PRO assessment in HF clinic visits did not impact patient-reported quality of life or other clinical outcomes. Alternate strategies and settings for embedding PROs into routine clinical care should be tested. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04164004.

Temporal Trends in Cardiovascular Disease Prevalence Among Asian American Subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Asian and multiracial individuals represent the 2 fastest growing racial and ethnic groups in the United States, yet most prior studies report Asian American and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander as a single racial group, with limited data on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevalence among subgroups. We sought to evaluate temporal trends in CVD burden among disaggregated Asian subgroups. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with CVD based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision (ICD-9 and ICD-10) coding who received care from a mixed-payer health care organization in California between 2008 and 2018 were classified into self-identified racial and ethnic subgroups (non-Hispanic White [NHW], Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiracial groups). Adjusted trends in CVD prevalence over time by subgroup were compared using logistic regression. Among 3 494 071 patient-years, prevalence of CVD increased faster among all subgroups except Japanese and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander patients (P<0.01 for each, reference: NHW). Filipino patients had the highest overall CVD prevalence, which increased from 34.3% to 45.1% over 11 years (increase from 17.3%-21.9%, P<0.0001, reference: NHW). Asian Indian patients had the fastest increase in CVD prevalence over time (16.9%-23.7%, P<0.0001, reference: NHW). Among subcategories of disease, hypertension increased faster among Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Korean, and multiracial groups (P<0.01 for all, reference: NHW), and coronary artery disease increased faster among Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, and Japanese groups (P<0.05 for each, reference: NHW). CONCLUSIONS: The increasing prevalence of CVD among disaggregated Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiracial subgroups over time highlights the importance of tailored approaches to addressing CVD in these diverse subpopulations.