American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2024
Medication optimization clinic decreases hospitalizations and mortality for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coons James C, Kliner Jennifer, Mathier Michael A, Mulukutla Suresh, Thoma Floyd, Sezer Ahmet, Keebler Mary
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a medication optimization clinic (MOC) on GDMT and outcomes for patients with HFrEF versus usual care.
DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of a multi-site MOC was conducted.
SETTING: Large health system with academic and community hospitals.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with HFrEF referred to MOC by their cardiologist versus usual care.
INTERVENTIONS: GDMT use managed by an advanced practice provider or clinical pharmacist through weekly telemedicine visits.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was HF hospitalization. Cardiovascular hospitalization and all-cause mortality were also assessed. Kaplan-Meier Curve, Cumulative Incidence Function, and competing risk analysis with regression models were conducted.
RESULTS: 1419 patients in MOC group were compared to 5116 control patients. GDMT use was significantly higher in MOC: quadruple therapy (49 % vs. 19 %; p < 0.0001), angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (62 % vs. 45 %; p < 0.0001), beta blocker (92 % vs. 88 %; p < 0.0001), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (69 % vs. 45 %; p < 0.0001), and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (68 % vs. 35 %; p < 0.0001). Competing risk analyses showed that HF and CV hospitalizations were significantly lower at all times points (3, 6, and 12 months) for MOC vs. control (p < 0.001). All-cause mortality was significantly lower at 6 months (p = 0.006) and 12 months (p < 0.001), but did not differ at 3 months (p = 0.35), for MOC vs. control.
CONCLUSIONS: MOC was associated with improved GDMT and lower risks of hospitalizations due to HF and any cardiovascular cause, and all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF.
DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of a multi-site MOC was conducted.
SETTING: Large health system with academic and community hospitals.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with HFrEF referred to MOC by their cardiologist versus usual care.
INTERVENTIONS: GDMT use managed by an advanced practice provider or clinical pharmacist through weekly telemedicine visits.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was HF hospitalization. Cardiovascular hospitalization and all-cause mortality were also assessed. Kaplan-Meier Curve, Cumulative Incidence Function, and competing risk analysis with regression models were conducted.
RESULTS: 1419 patients in MOC group were compared to 5116 control patients. GDMT use was significantly higher in MOC: quadruple therapy (49 % vs. 19 %; p < 0.0001), angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (62 % vs. 45 %; p < 0.0001), beta blocker (92 % vs. 88 %; p < 0.0001), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (69 % vs. 45 %; p < 0.0001), and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (68 % vs. 35 %; p < 0.0001). Competing risk analyses showed that HF and CV hospitalizations were significantly lower at all times points (3, 6, and 12 months) for MOC vs. control (p < 0.001). All-cause mortality was significantly lower at 6 months (p = 0.006) and 12 months (p < 0.001), but did not differ at 3 months (p = 0.35), for MOC vs. control.
CONCLUSIONS: MOC was associated with improved GDMT and lower risks of hospitalizations due to HF and any cardiovascular cause, and all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF.