Search

In heart failure, specific target doses for each drug are recommended, but some patients receive suboptimal dosing, others are undertreated or remain chronically in a titration phase, despite having no apparent contraindication or intolerance. We assessed the association of different levels of adherence to guidelines with outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Medical records of patients with HFrEF followed at our heart failure (HF) clinic for at least 6 months (n = 511) were reviewed and patients categorized as: 1) optimized (25.4%); 2) in-titration (29.0%); 3) undertreated (32.7%); and 4) intolerant/contraindicated (12.9%). Risk of mortality or HF events (hospitalization, emergency visit or ambulatory administration of intravenous diuretics) within one year was assessed using Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier curves.Compared to optimized patients, those intolerant (HR: 4.60 [95%CI: 2.23-9.48]; p 0.0001) had the highest risk of outcomes, followed by those undertreated (3.45 [1.78-6.67]; p = 0.0002) and in-titration (1.99 [0.97-4.06]; p = 0.0588). Overall predictors of outcomes included loop diuretics' use (4.54 [2.39-8.60]), undertreatment (2.38 [1.22-4.67]), intolerance/ contraindication to triple therapy (3.08 [1.47-6.42]), peripheral vascular disease (2.13 [1.29-3.50]) and NYHA class III-IV (1.89 [1.25-2.85]); all p 0.05.Level of adherence to guidelines is associated with outcomes, with intolerant/contraindicated patients having the worst prognosis and those undertreated and in-titration at intermediate risk compared to those optimized. Up-titration of therapy should be attempted whenever possible, considering patients' limitations, to potentially improve outcomes.

Use of health administrative databases is proposed for screening and monitoring of participants in randomized registry trials. However, access to these databases raises privacy concerns. We assessed patient's preferences regarding use of personal information to link their research records with national health databases, as part of a hypothetical randomized registry trial.Cardiology patients were invited to complete an anonymous self-reported survey that ascertained preferences related to the concept of accessing government health databases for research, the type of personal identifiers to be shared and the type of follow-up preferred as participants in a hypothetical trial. A total of 590 responders completed the survey (90% response rate), the majority of which were Caucasians (90.4%), male (70.0%) with a median age of 65years (interquartile range, 8). The majority responders (80.3%) would grant researchers access to health administrative databases for screening and follow-up. To this end, responders endorsed the recording of their personal identifiers by researchers for future record linkage, including their name (90%), and health insurance number (83.9%), but fewer responders agreed with the recording of their social security number (61.4%, p0.05 with date of birth as reference). Prior participation in a trial predicted agreement for granting researchers access to the administrative databases (OR: 1.69, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-2.90; p=0.04).The majority of Cardiology patients surveyed were supportive of use of their personal identifiers to access administrative health databases and conduct long-term monitoring in the context of a randomized registry trial.