Search

AIMS: Sex differences in long-term outcomes following hospitalization for heart failure (HF) across ejection fraction (EF) subtypes are not well described. In this study, we evaluated the risk of mortality and rehospitalization among males and females across the spectrum of EF over 5 years of follow-up following an index HF hospitalization event. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients hospitalized with HF between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2014 from the American Heart Associations Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry with available 5-year follow-up using Medicare Part A claims data were included. The association between sex and risk of mortality and readmission over a 5-year follow-up period for each HF subtype (HF with reduced EF [HFrEF, EF ≤40%], HF with mildly reduced EF [HFmrEF, EF 41-49%], and HF with preserved EF [HFpEF, EF >50%]) was assessed using adjusted Cox models. The effect modification by the HF subtype for the association between sex and outcomes was assessed by including multiplicative interaction terms in the models. A total of 155 670 patients (median age: 81 years, 53.4% female) were included. Over 5-year follow-up, males and females had comparably poor survival post-discharge; however, females (vs. males) had greater years of survival lost to HF compared with the median age- and sex-matched US population (HFpEF: 17.0 vs. 14.6 years; HFrEF: 17.3 vs. 15.1 years; HFmrEF: 17.7 vs. 14.6 years for age group 65-69 years). In adjusted analysis, females (vs. males) had a lower risk of 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.90, p

BACKGROUND: Coverage for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction was expanded in 2014, but contemporary referral and participation rates remain unknown. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (≤35%) in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from 2010 to 2020 were included, and CR referral status was described as yes, no, or not captured. Temporal trends in CR referral were assessed in the overall cohort. Patient and hospital-level predictors of CR referral were assessed using multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models. Additionally, CR referral and proportional utilization of CR within 1-year of referral were evaluated among patients aged >65 years with available Medicare administrative claims data who were clinically stable for 6-weeks postdischarge. Finally, the association of CR referral with the risk of 1-year death and readmission was evaluated using multivariable-adjusted Cox models. RESULTS: Of 69,441 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were eligible for CR (median age 67 years; 33% women; 30% Black), 17,076 (24.6%) were referred to CR, and referral rates increased from 8.1% in 2010 to 24.1% in 2020 (Ptrend

BACKGROUND: Heuristic biases are increasingly recognized, and potentially modifiable, contributors to patient care and outcomes. Left digit bias is a cognitive bias where continuous variables are categorized by their left-most digit. The impact of this heuristic bias applied to patient age on quality of care in heart failure has not been explored. METHODS: We examined participants admitted from 2005 to 2021 in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. To create 2 naturally randomized groups, isolating the effect of left digit bias, we dichotomized patients into those discharged within 60 days prior to their 80th birthday (N=4238) and those discharged within 60 days after their 80th birthday (N=4329). We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between discharge date relative to 80th birthday and several in-hospital quality metrics and in-hospital outcomes. Among Medicare participants (N=2759), we performed adjusted Cox regression to analyze the relationship between discharge date and risk of 1-year mortality or readmission. RESULTS: Among 8567 patients, 50.4% were female, 73% were non-Hispanic White, and 42.9% had an ejection fraction ≤40%. Discharge date relative to 80th birthday was not associated with numerous in-hospital quality metrics or in-hospital outcomes on unadjusted or adjusted logistic regression. Among Medicare beneficiaries, there was no association between discharge date and risk of mortality or readmission at 1-year postdischarge (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.95-1.12]; P=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: In a large registry of patients hospitalized for heart failure, we did not detect a left digit bias with respect to age at discharge, which resulted in differential quality of care or outcomes.

BackgroundA better understanding is needed of the burdens and benefits of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation on patients' physical, mental, and social well-being. The purpose of this report was to evaluate the validity of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures for LVAD patients and to estimate clinically important score differences likely to have implications for patient treatment or care.MethodsAdults from 12 sites across all US geographic regions completed PROMIS measures ≥3 months post-LVAD implantation. Other patient-reported outcomes (eg, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 item), clinician ratings, performance tests, and clinical adverse events were used as validity indicators. Criterion and construct validity and clinically important differences were estimated with Pearson correlations, ANOVA methods, and Cohen d effect sizes.ResultsParticipants' (n=648) mean age was 58 years, and the majority were men (78%), non-Hispanic White people (68%), with dilated cardiomyopathy (55%), long-term implantation strategy (57%), and New York Heart Association classes I and II (54%). Most correlations between validity indicators and PROMIS measures were medium to large (≥0.3; p

ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services uses a new peer group-based payment system to compare hospital performance as part of its Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which classifies hospitals into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible beneficiaries for Medicare and Medicaid. However, little is known about the association of a hospital's share of dual-eligible beneficiaries with the quality of care and outcomes for patients with heart failure (HF).ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between a hospital's proportion of patients with dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid and HF quality of care and outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated 436 196 patients hospitalized for HF using the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017. The analysis included patients 65 years or older with available data on dual-eligibility status. Hospitals were divided into quintiles based on their share of dual-eligible patients. Quality and outcomes were analyzed using unadjusted and adjusted multivariable logistic regression models. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2020, to January 1, 2021.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 30-day all-cause readmission. The secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 30-day HF readmissions, 30-day all-cause mortality, and HF process of care measures.ResultsA total of 436 196 hospitalized HF patients 65 years or older from 535 hospital sites were identified, with 258 995 hospitalized patients (median age, 81 years; interquartile range, 74-87 years) at 455 sites meeting the study criteria and included in the primary analysis. A total of 258 995 HF hospitalizations from 455 sites were included in the primary analysis of the study. Hospitals in the highest dual-eligibility quintile (quintile 5) tended to care for patients who were younger, were more likely to be female, belonged to racial minority groups, or were located in rural areas compared with quintile 1 sites. After multivariable adjustment, hospitals with the highest quintile of dual eligibility were associated with lower rates of key process measures, including evidence-based β-blocker prescription, measure of left ventricular function, and anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. Differences in clinical outcomes were seen with higher 30-day all-cause (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14-1.35) and HF (adjusted odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.27) readmissions in higher dual-eligible quintile 5 sites compared with quintile 1 sites. Risk-adjusted in-hospital and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ in quintile 1 vs quintile 5 hospitals.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, hospitals with a higher share of dual-eligible patients provided care with lower rates of some of the key HF quality of care process measures and with higher 30-day all-cause or HF readmissions compared with lower dual-eligibility quintile hospitals.

ObjectivesThis study compared the characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries who were hospitalized for heart failure (HF) and then discharged home who received home health care (HHC) to the characteristics of those who did not, and examined associations among HHC and readmission and mortality rates.BackgroundAfter hospitalization for HF, some patients receive HHC. However, the use of HHC over time, the factors associated with its use, and the post-discharge outcomes after receiving it are not well studied.MethodsThis study used Get With The Guidelines-HF data, merged with Medicare fee-for-service claims. Propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the associations between HHC and post-discharge outcomes.ResultsFrom 2005 to 2015, 95,531 patients were admitted for HF, and 32,697 (34.2%) received HHC after discharge. The rate of HHC increased over time from 31.4% to 36.1% (p

AimsTo determine the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), during selection of oral anticoagulant (OAC) and rhythm control treatments, in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods and resultsWe evaluated survey data from 1006 patients with new-onset AF enrolled at 56 US sites participating in the SATELLITE substudy of the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT II). Patients completed surveys at enrolment and at 6-month follow-up. Patients were asked about who made their AF treatment decisions. Shared decision-making was classified as one that the patient felt was an autonomous decision or a shared decision with their healthcare provider (HCP). Approximately half of patients reported that their OAC treatment decisions were made entirely by their HCP. Compared with those reporting no SDM, patients reporting SDM for OAC were more often female (47.2% vs. 38.4%), while patients reporting SDM for rhythm control were more often male (62.2% vs. 57.6%). The most important factors cited by patients during decision-making for OAC were reducing stroke and bleeding risk, and their HCP's recommendations. After adjustment, patients with self-reported understanding of OAC, and rhythm control options, had higher odds of having participated in SDM [odds ratio (OR) 2.54, confidence interval (CI): 1.75-3.68 and OR 2.36, CI: 1.50-3.71, both P ≤ 0.001, respectively].ConclusionShared decision-making is not widely implemented in contemporary AF practice. Patient understanding about available therapeutic options is associated with a more than a two-fold higher likelihood of SDM, and may be a potential target for future interventions.

BackgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a known risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, it remains unclear whether OSA is independently associated with worse cardiovascular and neurological outcomes in patients with AF.MethodsWe used the ORBIT-AF I and ORBIT-AF II to conduct a retrospective cohort study of 22,760 patients with AF with and without OSA. Adjusted multivariable Cox proportional hazards models was used to determine whether OSA was associated with increased risk for major adverse cardiac and neurologic events (MACNEs) (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack/non-central nervous system embolism (stroke/SE), and new-onset heart failure], combined and individually.ResultsA total of 4,045 (17.8%) patients had OSA at baseline. Median follow-up time was 1.5 (interquartile range: 1-2.2) years, and 1,895 patients experienced a MACNE. OSA patients were younger (median [interquartile range] 68 [61-75] years vs 74 [66-81] years), were more likely male (70.7% vs 55.3%), and had increased body mass index (median 34.6 kg/m2 [29.8-40.2] vs 28.7 kg/m2 [25.2-33.0]). Those with OSA had a higher prevalence of concomitant comorbidities such as diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart failure. OSA patients had higher use of antithrombotic therapy. After adjustment, the presence of OSA was significantly associated with MACNE (hazard ratio: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.03-1.31], P = .011). OSA was also an independent risk factor for stroke/SE beyond the CHA2DS2-VASc risk factors (HR: 1.38 [95% CI 1.12-1.70], P = .003) but not cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, new-onset heart failure, or major bleeding.ConclusionsAmong patients with AF, OSA is an independent risk factor for MACNE and, more specifically, stroke/SE.

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) adversely impacts health-related quality of life (hrQoL). While some patients demonstrate improvements in hrQoL, the factors associated with large improvements in hrQoL are not well described.MethodsWe assessed factors associated with a 1-year increase in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life score of 1 SD (≥18 points; 3× clinically important difference), among outpatients in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation I registry.ResultsOverall, 28% (181/636) of patients had such a hrQoL improvement. Compared with patients not showing large hrQoL improvement, they were of similar age (median 73 versus 74, P=0.3), equally likely to be female (44% versus 48%, P=0.3), but more likely to have newly diagnosed AF at baseline (18% versus 8%; P=0.0004), prior antiarrhythmic drug use (52% versus 40%, P=0.005), baseline antiarrhythmic drug use (34.8% versus 26.8%, P=0.045), and more likely to undergo AF-related procedures during follow-up (AF ablation: 6.6% versus 2.0%, P=0.003; cardioversion: 12.2% versus 5.9%, P=0.008). In multivariable analysis, a history of alcohol abuse (adjusted OR, 2.41; P=0.01) and increased baseline diastolic blood pressure (adjusted OR, 1.23 per 10-point increase and >65 mm Hg; P=0.04) were associated with large improvements in hrQoL at 1 year, whereas patients with prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral arterial disease were less likely to improve (P

BackgroundComorbidities are common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and affect prognosis, yet are often undertreated. However, contemporary rates of use of guideline-directed therapies (GDT) for non-AF comorbidities and their association with outcomes are not well described.MethodsWe used the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) to test the association between GDT for non-AF comorbidities and major adverse cardiac or neurovascular events (MACNE; cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke/thromboembolism, or new-onset heart failure), all-cause mortality, new-onset heart failure, and AF progression. Adjustment was performed using Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression.ResultsOnly 6,782 (33%) of the 20,434 patients eligible for 1 or more GDT for non-AF comorbidities received all indicated therapies. Use of all comorbidity-specific GDT was highest for patients with hyperlipidemia (75.6%) and lowest for those with diabetes mellitus (43.1%). Use of "all eligible" GDT was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward lower rates of MACNE (HR 0.90 [0.79-1.02]) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.90 [0.80-1.01]). Use of GDT for heart failure was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.77 [0.67-0.89]), and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea was associated with a lower risk of AF progression (OR 0.75 [0.62-0.90]).ConclusionsIn AF patients, there is underuse of GDT for non-AF comorbidities. The association between GDT use and outcomes was strongest in heart failure and obstructive sleep apnea patients where use of GDT was associated with lower mortality and less AF progression.

Background Limited data exist to guide treatment for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation, including the important decision regarding rate versus rhythm control. Methods and Results We analyzed the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry linked to Medicare claims data from 2008 to 2014 to describe current treatments for rate versus rhythm control and subsequent outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and atrial fibrillation using inverse probability weighted analysis. Rhythm control was defined as use of an antiarrhythmic medication, cardioversion, or AF ablation or surgery. Rate control was defined as use of any combination of β-blocker, calcium channel blocker, and digoxin without evidence of rhythm control. Among 15 682 fee-for-service Medicare patients, at the time of discharge, 1857 were treated with rhythm control and 13 825 with rate control, with minimal differences in baseline characteristics between groups. There was higher all-cause death at 1 year in the rate control compared with the rhythm control group (37.5% and 30.8%, respectively, P

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) therapy may be beneficial to patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but little is known about their use in patients with AF and subsequent outcomes. In order to better understand MRA use and subsequent outcomes, we performed a retrospective cohort study of the contemporary ORBIT-AF (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation) registry. AF progression and cardiovascular outcomes were compared using propensity-matched Cox proportional hazards modeling according to MRA use at baseline and new MRA use at follow-up versus patients with no MRA use. Among 7012 patients with nonpermanent AF, 320 patients were taking MRA at enrollment, and 416 patients initiated MRA use during follow-up. The mean patient age was 72.5 years, 56.3% were men, and 70.4% had paroxysmal AF. Among all patients taking MRAs, 434 (59.0%) had heart failure, 655 (89.0%) had hypertension, and 380 (51.6%) had both. After adjustment, new MRA use was not associated with reduced AF progression (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.58; P=0.27) but showed a trend towards lower risk of stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-1.23; P=0.08). Results were similar for a comparison of new MRA users and baseline MRA users compared with nonusers. In community-based outpatients with AF, the majority of MRA use was for heart failure and hypertension. MRA use also trended towards lower adjusted stroke risk. Future studies should test the hypothesis that MRA use may decrease the risk of stroke in patients with AF.

Medication adherence improves outcomes for patients with heart failure, but adherence rates remain low. We examined the association between earlier postdischarge follow-up and medication adherence. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients ≥65 years who were hospitalized for heart failure, covered by Medicare Part D, and discharged alive from April 2006 to October 2012 using the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry linked to Medicare claims. Patients were categorized into 4 groups by timing of first postdischarge follow-up visit: ≤1, 1 to 2, 2 to 6, and >6 weeks. Medication adherence was defined by proportion of days covered of >80% at 90 days and 1-year posthospital discharge to 5 guideline-directed medical therapies (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, evidence-based β-blocker, aldosterone antagonist, hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate, and anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation). Among 9878 patients with heart failure, 73% had left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, median age was 78 years (25th-75th percentile, 71-84), and 48% were male. Overall, 30% had a follow-up appointment within 1-week postdischarge and 25% >6 weeks. At 1 year, medication adherence was 53% for evidence-based β-blockers, 48% for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and 8% for hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate. We found no significant association between timing of first follow-up visit and medication adherence at 1 year (1.04, 0.92-1.17) when comparing follow-up visits >6 weeks to the earliest ones. Posthospital heart failure discharge, overall adherence to medical therapies in Medicare beneficiaries was low. Early follow-up was not associated with increased medication adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy in the short or long term.

ObjectiveTo describe self-reported disease understanding for newly diagnosed patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and assess (1) how disease understanding changes over the first 6 months after diagnosis and (2) the relationship between patient understanding of therapies at baseline and treatment receipt at 6 months among treatment-naïve patients.MethodsWe analysed survey data from SATELLITE (Survey of Patient Knowledge and Personal Priorities for Treatment), a substudy of patients with new-onset AF enrolled in the national Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT) II registry across 56 US sites. Patients were surveyed at the baseline and 6-month follow-up clinic visits using Likert scales.ResultsAmong 1004 baseline survey responses, patients' confidence in their understanding of rhythm control, ablation, anticoagulation and cardioversion was suboptimal, with 'high' understanding ranging from 8.5% for left atrial appendage closure to 71.3% for rhythm therapy. Of medical history and demographic factors, education level was the strongest predictor of reporting 'high' disease understanding. Among the 786 patients with 6-month survey data, significant increases in the proportion reporting high understanding were observed (p

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are indicated for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but require lower doses in certain patients. We sought to describe the frequency, appropriateness (according to Food and Drug Administration labeling), and outcomes of patients prescribed reduced doses of NOACs in community practice. We analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF II (The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II) registry, a prospective, national, observational registry of AF patients. Among 7925 AF patients receiving NOACs, we assessed patterns of use of reduced NOAC doses and associated cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes at median follow-up of 1 year. Overall, 6636 patients (84%) received a NOAC at standard dose, which was consistent with US Food and Drug Administration labeling in 6376 (96%). Reduced NOAC dose was prescribed to 1289 (16% overall), which was consistent with Food and Drug Administration labeling in only 555 patients (43%). Compared with those whose NOAC dose was appropriately reduced, patients receiving inappropriate dose reductions were younger (median age 79 versus 84, P

ImportancePublic reporting of hospitals' 30-day risk-standardized readmission rates following heart failure hospitalization and the financial penalization of hospitals with higher rates have been associated with a reduction in 30-day readmissions but have raised concerns regarding the potential for unintended consequences.ObjectiveTo examine the association of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) with readmission and mortality outcomes among patients hospitalized with heart failure within a prospective clinical registry that allows for detailed risk adjustment.Design, setting, and participantsInterrupted time-series and survival analyses of index heart failure hospitalizations were conducted from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2014. This study included 115 245 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries across 416 US hospital sites participating in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. Data analysis took place from January 1, 2017, to June 8, 2017.ExposuresTime intervals related to the HRRP were before the HRRP implementation (January 1, 2006, to March 31, 2010), during the HRRP implementation (April 1, 2010, to September 30, 2012), and after the HRRP penalties went into effect (October 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014).Main outcomes and measuresRisk-adjusted 30-day and 1-year all-cause readmission and mortality rates.ResultsThe mean (SD) age of the study population (n = 115 245) was 80.5 (8.4) years, 62 927 (54.6%) were women, and 91 996 (81.3%) were white and 11 037 (9.7%) were black. The 30-day risk-adjusted readmission rate declined from 20.0% before the HRRP implementation to 18.4% in the HRRP penalties phase (hazard ratio (HR) after vs before the HRRP implementation, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.95; P

BackgroundAs treatment options for atrial fibrillation (AF) increase, more attention is focused on patients' experiences and quality of life (QoL). However, little is known about the factors associated with these outcomes.MethodsThe Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life (AFEQT) is a disease-specific QoL tool for AF, with domain and summary scores ranging from 0 (the worst QoL) to 100. Using multivariable linear regression, we evaluated factors associated with baseline AFEQT Summary and Subscale Scores in ORBIT AF, a large, community-based AF registry. Independent associations were reported as coefficient estimates in scores and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOverall, AFEQT was assessed in 2007 AF outpatients from 99 sites. Median age (IQR) was 76 years (67-82) and 43% were female. The median AFEQT summary score was 82 (67-94). Female sex, younger age, new onset AF, higher heart rate, obstructive sleep apnea, symptomatic heart failure (HF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and coronary artery disease were all independently associated with reduced QoL. Female sex [Estimate -7.03, 95% CI (-9.31, -4.75)] and new onset versus permanent AF [Estimate -7.44, 95% CI (-11.03, -3.84)] were independently associated with increased symptoms. NYHA Class III or IV HF [Estimate -14.44, 95% CI (-19.46, -8.76)] and female sex [Estimate -7.91, 95% CI (-9.95, -5.88)] were most independently associated with impaired daily activities.ConclusionsQoL in patients with AF varies widely and is associated with several patient factors. Understanding patient factors independently associated with worse QoL can be a foundation for tailoring treatment.

BackgroundGuidelines for heart failure (HF) recommend prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy before hospital discharge; some of these therapies are included in publicly reported performance measures. The burden of new medications for individual patients has not been described.Methods and resultsWe used Get With The Guidelines-HF registry data from 2008 to 2013 to characterize prescribing, indications, and contraindications for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, aldosterone antagonists, hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate, and anticoagulants. The difference between a patient's medication regimen at hospital admission and that recommended by HF quality measures at discharge was calculated. Among 158 922 patients from 271 hospitals with a primary discharge diagnosis of HF, initiation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers was indicated in 18.1% of all patients (55.5% of those eligible at discharge were not receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers at admission), β-blockers in 20.3% (50.5% of eligible), aldosterone antagonists in 24.1% (87.4% of eligible), hydralazine/isosorbide dinitrate in 8.6% (93.1% of eligible), and anticoagulants in 18.0% (58.0% of eligible). Cumulatively, 0.4% of patients were eligible for 5 new medication groups, 4.1% for 4 new medication groups, 9.4% for 3 new medication groups, 10.1% for 2 new medication groups, and 22.7% for 1 new medication group; 15.0% were not eligible for new medications because of adequate prescribing at admission; and 38.4% were not eligible for any medications recommended by HF quality measures. Compared with newly indicated medications (mean, 1.45 ± 1.23), actual new prescriptions were lower (mean, 1.16 ± 1.00).ConclusionsA quarter of patients hospitalized with HF need to start >1 medication to meet HF quality measures. Systems for addressing medication initiation and managing polypharmacy are central to HF transitional care.

BackgroundAlthough digoxin has long been used to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF), its safety remains controversial.ObjectivesThis study sought to describe digoxin use over time in patients with AF who were stratified by the presence or absence of HF, to characterize the predictors of digoxin use and initiation, and to correlate digoxin use with outcomes.MethodsLongitudinal patterns of digoxin use and its association with a variety of outcomes were assessed in a prospective outpatient registry conducted at 174 U.S. sites with enrollment from June 2010 to August 2011.ResultsAmong 9,619 patients with AF and serial follow-up every 6 months for up to 3 years, 2,267 (23.6%) received digoxin at study enrollment, 681 (7.1%) were initiated on digoxin during follow-up, and 6,671 (69.4%) were never prescribed digoxin. After adjusting for other medications, heart rate was 72.9 beats/min among digoxin users and 71.5 beats/min among nonusers (p < 0.0001). Prevalent digoxin use at registry enrollment was not associated with subsequent onset of symptoms, hospitalization, or mortality (in patients with HF, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for death: 1.04; without HF, HR: 1.22). Incident digoxin use during follow-up was not associated with subsequent death in patients with HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.05), but was associated with subsequent death in those without HF (propensity adjusted HR: 1.99).ConclusionsAfter adjustment for detailed clinical factors, digoxin use in registry patients with AF had a neutral association with outcomes under most circumstances. Because of the multiple conflicting observational reports about digoxin's safety and possible concerns in specific clinical situations, a large pragmatic trial of digoxin therapy in AF is needed.

BackgroundPrior claims analyses suggest that the use of intravenous inotropic therapy for patients hospitalized with heart failure varies substantially by hospital. Whether differences in the clinical characteristics of the patients explain observed differences in the use of inotropic therapy is not known.Methods and resultsWe sought to characterize institutional variation in inotrope use among patients hospitalized with heart failure before and after accounting for clinical factors of patients. Hierarchical generalized linear regression models estimated risk-standardized hospital-level rates of inotrope use within 209 hospitals participating in Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry between 2005 and 2011. The association between risk-standardized rates of inotrope use and clinical outcomes was determined. Overall, an inotropic agent was administered in 7691 of 126 564 (6.1%) heart failure hospitalizations: dobutamine 43%, dopamine 24%, milrinone 17%, or a combination 16%. Patterns of inotrope use were stable during the 7-year study period. Use of inotropes varied significantly between hospitals even after accounting for patient and hospital characteristics (median risk-standardized hospital rate, 5.9%; interquartile range, 3.7%-8.6%; range, 1.3%-32.9%). After adjusting for case-mix and hospital structural differences, model intraclass correlation indicated that 21% of the observed variation in inotrope use was potentially attributable to random hospital effects (ie, institutional preferences). Hospitals with higher risk-standardized inotrope use had modestly longer risk-standardized length of stay (P=0.005) but had no difference in risk-standardized inpatient mortality (P=0.12).ConclusionsUse of intravenous inotropic agents during hospitalization for heart failure varies significantly among US hospitals even after accounting for patient and hospital factors.