Search

Background/objectivesGuideline-based management of cardiovascular disease often involves prescribing multiple medications, which contributes to polypharmacy and risk for adverse drug events in older adults. Deprescribing is a potential strategy to mitigate these risks. We sought to characterize and compare clinician perspectives regarding deprescribing cardiovascular medications across three specialties.DesignNational cross-sectional survey.SettingAmbulatory.ParticipantsRandom sample of geriatricians, general internists, and cardiologists from the American College of Physicians.MeasurementsElectronic survey assessing clinical practice of deprescribing cardiovascular medications, reasons and barriers to deprescribing, and choice of medications to deprescribe in hypothetical clinical cases.ResultsIn each specialty, 750 physicians were surveyed, with a response rate of 26% for geriatricians, 26% for general internists, and 12% for cardiologists. Over 80% of respondents within each specialty reported that they had recently considered deprescribing a cardiovascular medication. Adverse drug reactions were the most common reason for deprescribing for all specialties. Geriatricians also commonly reported deprescribing in the setting of limited life expectancy. Barriers to deprescribing were shared across specialties and included concerns about interfering with other physicians' treatment plans and patient reluctance. In hypothetical cases, over 90% of physicians in each specialty chose to deprescribe when patients experienced adverse drug reactions. Geriatricians were most likely and cardiologists were least likely to consider deprescribing cardiovascular medications in cases of limited life expectancy (all P

ObjectivesTo identify the top priority areas for research to optimize pharmacotherapy in older adults with cardiovascular disease (CVD).DesignConsensus meeting.SettingMultidisciplinary workshop supported by the National Institute on Aging, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Geriatrics Society, February 6-7, 2017.ParticipantsLeaders in the Cardiology and Geriatrics communities, (officers in professional societies, journal editors, clinical trialists, Division chiefs), representatives from the NIA; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Food and Drug Administration; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, pharmaceutical industry, and trainees and early career faculty with interests in geriatric cardiology.MeasurementsSummary of workshop proceedings and recommendations.ResultsTo better align older adults' healthcare preferences with their care, research is needed to improve skills in patient engagement and communication. Similarly, to coordinate and meet the needs of older adults with multiple comorbidities encountering multiple healthcare providers and systems, systems and disciplines must be integrated. The lack of data from efficacy trials of CVD medications relevant to the majority of older adults creates uncertainty in determining the risks and benefits of many CVD therapies; thus, developing evidence-based guidelines for older adults with CVD is a top research priority. Polypharmacy and medication nonadherence lead to poor outcomes in older people, making research on appropriate prescribing and deprescribing to reduce polypharmacy and methods to improve adherence to beneficial therapies a priority.ConclusionThe needs and circumstances of older adults with CVD differ from those that the current medical system has been designed to meet. Optimizing pharmacotherapy in older adults will require new data from traditional and pragmatic research to determine optimal CVD therapy, reduce polypharmacy, increase adherence, and meet person-centered goals. Better integration of the multiple systems and disciplines involved in the care of older adults will be essential to implement and disseminate best practices. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:371-380, 2019.

Historically, the medical subspecialties have not focused on the needs of older adults. This has changed with the implementation of initiatives to integrate geriatrics and aging research into the medical and surgical subspecialties and with the establishment of a home for internal medicine specialists within the annual American Geriatrics Society (AGS) meeting. With the support of AGS, other professional societies, philanthropies, and federal agencies, efforts to integrate geriatrics into the medical and surgical subspecialties have focused largely on training the next generation of physicians and researchers. They have engaged several subspecialties, which have followed parallel paths in integrating geriatrics and aging research. As a result of these combined efforts, there has been enormous progress in the integration of geriatrics and aging research into the medical and surgical subspecialties, and topics once considered to be geriatric concerns are becoming mainstream in medicine, but this integration remains a work in progress and will need to adapt to changes associated with healthcare reform.

Although cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death and major disability in older adults, older patients have been consistently under‐represented in most cardiovascular clinical trials. This article summarizes the results of four trials published from 2020 to 2022 with practice‐changing implications directly applicable to the care of older adults. The key findings from these trials were that: (1) an initial conservative approach to managing selected patients with stable ischemic heart disease is reasonable, even in the setting of moderate or severe ischemia; (2) empagliflozin is effective in reducing heart failure hospitalizations in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction, with or without diabetes; (3) an individually tailored physical rehabilitation program reduces deconditioning and functional decline in older patients hospitalized with heart failure; and (4) restricting dietary sodium intake to less than 1500 mg/day is unlikely to improve outcomes in most patients with heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial comments on the article by Wang et al. in this issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]