Patterns, Prognostic Implications, and Rural-Urban Disparities in Optimal GDMT Following HFrEF Diagnosis Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Amgad Mentias, Neil Keshvani, Andrew Sumarsono, Rohan Desai, Muhammad Shahzeb Khan, Venu Menon, Eileen Hsich, Adam P. Bress, Joshua Jacobs, Ramachandran S. Vasan, Gregg C. Fonarow, Ambarish Pandey

Producción científica: Articlerevisión exhaustiva

3 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Background: Patterns and disparities in guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) uptake for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) across rural vs urban regions are not well described. Objectives: This study aims to evaluate patterns, prognostic implications, and rural-urban differences in GDMT use among Medicare beneficiaries following new-onset HFrEF. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of new-onset HFrEF in a 5% Medicare sample with available data for Part D medication use were identified from January 2015 through December 2020. The primary exposure was residence in rural vs urban zip codes. Optimal triple GDMT was defined as ≥50% of the target daily dose of beta-blockers, ≥50% of the target daily dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker or any dose of sacubitril/valsartan, and any dose of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The association between the achievement of optimal GDMT over time following new-onset HFrEF diagnosis and risk of all-cause mortality and subsequent HF hospitalization was also evaluated using adjusted Cox models. The association between living in rural vs urban location and time to optimal GDMT achievement over a 12-month follow-up was assessed using cumulative incidence curves and adjusted Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models. Results: A total of 41,296 patients (age: 76.7 years; 15.0% Black; 27.6% rural) were included. Optimal GDMT use over the 12-month follow-up was low, with 22.5% initiated on any dose of triple GDMT and 9.1% on optimal GDMT doses. Optimal GDMT on follow-up was significantly associated with a lower risk of death (HR: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.85-0.94]; P < 0.001) and subsequent HF hospitalization (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-0.98]; P = 0.02). Optimal GDMT use at 12 months was significantly lower among patients living in rural (vs urban) areas (8.4% vs 9.3%; P = 0.02). In adjusted analysis, living in rural (vs urban) locations was associated with a significantly lower probability of achieving optimal GDMT (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.86-0.98]; P = 0.01 Differences in optimal GDMT use following HFrEF diagnosis accounted for 16% of excess mortality risk among patients living in rural (vs urban) areas. Conclusions: Use of optimal GDMT following new-onset HFrEF diagnosis is low, with substantially lower use noted among patients living in rural vs urban locations. Suboptimal GDMT use following new-onset HFrEF was associated with an increased risk of mortality and subsequent HF hospitalization.

Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)1044-1055
Número de páginas12
PublicaciónJACC: Heart Failure
Volumen12
N.º6
DOI
EstadoPublished - jun 2024
Publicado de forma externa

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Huella

Profundice en los temas de investigación de 'Patterns, Prognostic Implications, and Rural-Urban Disparities in Optimal GDMT Following HFrEF Diagnosis Among Medicare Beneficiaries'. En conjunto forman una huella única.

Citar esto