Search

Aims: To compare the cost-effectiveness of immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin treatment in patients with a history of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) from the UK, Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives., Methods and Results: A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-analytic Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, type 2 diabetes mellitus status and incidence of heart failure (HF) events. Patient-level data for patients with prior HHF from the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial were used to inform the model inputs on clinical events and utility values. Healthcare costs were sourced from the relevant national reference databases and the published literature. Compared to standard therapy, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin decreased HHF (187 events), urgent HF visits (32 events) and cardiovascular mortality (18 events). Standard therapy was associated with lifetime costs of £13 224 and 4.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Twelve-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin was associated with total discounted lifetime costs and QALYs of £16 660 and 4.61, respectively, compared to £16 912 and 4.66, respectively, for immediate initiation. Compared to standard therapy, immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5779 and £5821, respectively. Compared to 12-month delayed initiation, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin had an ICER of £5263. Results were similar from the Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives., Conclusion: Both immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin are cost-effective. However, immediate initiation provides greater clinical benefits, with almost 10% additional QALYs gain, compared to 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin and should be considered standard of care., (© 2023 Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AstraZeneca and The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

In this update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure (HF) guidelines, we provide comprehensive recommendations and practical tips for the pharmacologic management of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since the 2017 comprehensive update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines for the management of HF, substantial new evidence has emerged that has informed the care of these patients. In particular, we focus on the role of novel pharmacologic therapies for HFrEF including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, sodium glucose transport 2 inhibitors, and soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators in conjunction with other long established HFrEF therapies. Updated recommendations are also provided in the context of the clinical setting for which each of these agents might be prescribed; the potential value of each therapy is reviewed, where relevant, for chronic HF, new onset HF, and for HF hospitalization. We define a new standard of pharmacologic care for HFrEF that incorporates 4 key therapeutic drug classes as standard therapy for most patients: an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (as first-line therapy or after angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker titration); a β-blocker; a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; and a sodium glucose transport 2 inhibitor. Additionally, many patients with HFrEF will have clinical characteristics for which we recommended other key therapies to improve HF outcomes, including sinus node inhibitors, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators, hydralazine/nitrates in combination, and/or digoxin. Finally, an approach to management that integrates prioritized pharmacologic with nonpharmacologic and invasive therapies after a diagnosis of HFrEF is highlighted., (Copyright © 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure (HF) Guidelines Program has generated annual HF updates, including formal recommendations and supporting Practical Tips since 2006. Many clinicians indicate they routinely use the Canadian Cardiovascular Society HF Guidelines in their daily practice. However, many questions surrounding the actual implementation of the Guidelines into their daily practice remain. A consensus-based approach was used, including feedback from the Primary and Secondary HF Panels. This companion is intended to answer several key questions brought forth by HF practitioners such as appropriate timelines for initial assessments and subsequent reassessments of patients, the order in which medications should be added, how newer medications should be included in treatment algorithms, and when left ventricular function should be reassessed. A new treatment algorithm for HF with reduced ejection fraction is included. Several other practical issues are addressed such as an approach to management of hyperkalemia/hypokalemia, treatment of gout, when medications can be stopped, and whether a target blood pressure or heart rate is suggested. Finally, elements and teaching of self-care are described. This tool will hopefully function to allow better integration of the HF Guidelines into clinical practice., (Copyright © 2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The 2014 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Heart Failure Management Guidelines Update provides discussion on the management recommendations on 3 focused areas: (1) anemia; (2) biomarkers, especially natriuretic peptides; and (3) clinical trials that might change practice in the management of patients with heart failure. First, all patients with heart failure and anemia should be investigated for reversible causes of anemia. Second, patients with chronic stable heart failure should undergo natriuretic peptide testing. Third, considerations should be given to treat selected patients with heart failure and preserved systolic function with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and to treat patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with an angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor, when the drug is approved. As with updates in previous years, the topics were chosen in response to stakeholder feedback. The 2014 Update includes recommendations, values and preferences, and practical tips to assist the clinicians and health care workers to best manage patients with heart failure., (Copyright © 2015 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure is a costly health condition and a major public health concern. We sought to examine the costs of hospital admissions for heart failure between fiscal years 2004 and 2013 in Canada and to model the future costs to 2030. Methods: Canadian Institutes for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database was used to identify admissions to hospital with heart failure as the primary diagnosis between fiscal years 2004 and 2013. Multiple linear regression models were used to calculate the trend in prevalence and extrapolate these to 2030. Canadian Institutes for Health Information patient cost estimates were used to identify costs of hospital admissions for heart failure. Generalized linear models were used to estimate average annual costs per heart failure patient. We conducted a sensitivity analysis including all admissions for heart failure in any diagnostic field. Results: In 2013, 45 600 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43 800-47 200) patients were admitted with heart failure as the primary diagnosis, accounting for $482 (95% CI $464-$500) million. By 2030, we estimate 54 000 (95% CI 49 000-60 000) patients and costs of $722 (95% CI $650-$801) million, with older adults (age ≥ 80 yr) accounting for 52% of costs. Including admissions for which heart failure was a secondary diagnosis increases the total cost to $2.8 (95% CI $2.6-$3.0) billion in 2030. Interpretation: As in other developed countries, hospital costs related to heart failure in Canada are on the rise. Older adults are the main consumers of such hospital services. Strategies to improve outpatient care to reduce rates of admission for heart failure are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In North America and other industrialized countries, heart failure (HF) has become a national public health priority. Studies indicate there is significant heterogeneity in approaches to treat and manage HF and suggest targeted changes in health care delivery are needed to reduce unnecessary health care utilization and to optimize patient outcomes. Most recent published studies have reported on the care of HF patients in tertiary care hospitals and the perspective of non-specialist stakeholders on HF management, such as general practitioners and clinics or hospital administrators is rarely considered. This study explores the current state of community-based HF care in Canada as experienced by various healthcare stakeholders providing or coordinating care to HF patients. Methods: This study employed a qualitative exploratory research design consisting of semi-structured telephone interviews conducted with health care providers and health care administrators working outside of tertiary care in the four most populous Canadian provinces. A modified thematic analysis process was used and the different data sources were triangulated. Findings were collectively interpreted by the authors. Results: Twenty-eight participants were recruited in the study: eight cardiologists, five general practitioners/family physicians, eight nurse practitioners/registered nurses, four hospital pharmacists and three health care administrators/directors. Participants reported a lack of stakeholder engagement throughout the continuum of care, which hinders the implementation of a coordinated approach to quality HF care. Four substantive themes emerged that indicated challenges and gaps in the optimal treatment and management of HF in community settings: 1) challenges in the risk assessment and early diagnosis of HF, 2) challenges in ensuring efficient and consistent transition from acute care setting to the community, 3) challenges of primary care providers to optimally treat and manage HF patients, and 4) challenges in promoting a holistic approach in HF management. Conclusions: As health systems evolve from tertiary-based care to community-based outpatient services for the management of chronic diseases, this study's findings pinpoint challenges that have been observed in the Canadian context and can stimulate and orient dialogue toward solutions for a more coordinated approach to improve the care of HF patients and reduce pressure on the healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]