Novel Strategies to Improve Prescription of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Heart Failure

Physician-Reported Facilitators and Barriers for Side Effect Management of Heart Failure Medications

BACKGROUND

Physician underprescribing and patient nonadherence are major barriers to the benefits of guideline-directed medical therapy. An important contributor to both underprescribing and patient nonadherence is concern about medication-related side effects. Yet, there are few to no data on approaches used by physicians to: (1) elicit medication-related side effects, (2) attribute these side effects to specific medications, and (3) take appropriate action.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The authors conducted semistructured interviews with physicians to identify facilitators and barriers to each critical step of heart failure medication management: elicitation of side effects, attribution of side effects to a medication, and action in response to attributed side effects. Interviews were transcribed and coded using directed content analysis. For elicitation of potential side effects, limited patient communication and family discordance in reporting were key barriers, whereas guiding questions, measurement, and open channels of communication were key facilitators. For attribution of side effects, confounding from other medications, limited time for clinical encounters, and nonspecific symptoms were key barriers, whereas time-limited medication discontinuation trials and medication rechallenges were key facilitators. For taking action, challenges with weighing risks and benefits and physician fear about causing harm or interfering with other clinicians were barriers, whereas patient-physician communication and the results of a medication discontinuation trials and medication rechallenge were facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

This study generated key facilitators and barriers to 3 key aspects of heart failure medication management related to side effects that should drive future work to improve heart failure medication management.

Interventions for Optimization of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy: A Systematic Review

Importance

Implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in real-world practice remains suboptimal. It is unclear which interventions are most effective at addressing current barriers to GDMT in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

Objective

To perform a systematic review to identify which types of system-level initiatives are most effective at improving GDMT use among patients with HFrEF.

Evidence Review

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases were queried from January 2010 to November 2023 for randomized clinical trials that implemented a quality improvement intervention with GDMT use as a primary or secondary outcome. References from related review articles were also included for screening. Quality of studies and bias assessment were graded based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Findings

Twenty-eight randomized clinical trials were included with an aggregate sample size of 19 840 patients. Studies were broadly categorized as interdisciplinary interventions (n = 15), clinician education (n = 5), electronic health record initiatives (n = 6), or patient education (n = 2). Overall, interdisciplinary titration clinics were associated with significant increases in the proportion of patients on target doses of GDMT with a 10% to 60% and 2% to 53% greater proportion of patients on target doses of β-blockers and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, respectively, in intervention groups compared with usual care. Other interventions, such as audits, clinician and patient education, or electronic health record alerts, were also associated with some improvements in GDMT utilization, though these findings were inconsistent across studies.

Conclusions and Relevance

This review summarizes interventions aimed at optimization of GDMT in clinical practice. Initiatives that used interdisciplinary teams, largely comprised of nurses and pharmacists, most consistently led to improvements in GDMT. Additional large, randomized studies are necessary to better understand other types of interventions, as well as their long-term efficacy and sustainability.

Bridging gaps and optimizing implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure

Despite robust scientific evidence and strong guideline recommendations, there remain significant gaps in initiation and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure (HF) among eligible patients. Reasons surrounding these gaps are multifactorial, and largely attributed to patient, healthcare professionals, and institutional challenges. Concurrently, HF remains a predominant cause of mortality and hospitalization, emphasizing the critical need for improved delivery of therapy to patients in routine clinical practice. To optimize GDMT, various implementation strategies have emerged in the recent decade such as in-hospital rapid initiation of GDMT, improving patient adherence, addressing clinical inertia, improving affordability, engagement in quality improvement registries, multidisciplinary clinics, and EHR-integrated interventions. This review highlights the current use and barriers to optimal utilization of GDMT, and proposes novel strategies aimed at improving GDMT in HF.

Optimization of GDMT for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: can physiological and biological barriers explain the gaps in adherence to heart failure guidelines?

Heart failure is a growing epidemic with high mortality rates and recurrent hospital admissions that creates a burden on affected individuals, their caregivers and the whole healthcare system. Throughout the years, many randomized trials have established the effectiveness of several pharmacological therapies and electrophysiological devices to reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life and survival, mostly for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). These studies led to the publication of national societies' recommendations to guide clinicians in the management of HFrEF. Yet, many reports have shown significant care gaps in adherence to these recommendations in clinical practice, highlighting suboptimal use and/or dosing of evidence-based therapies. Adherence to guidelines has been shown to be associated with the best prognosis in HFrEF, with patients presenting with intolerances or contraindications having the highest risk of events; however, it remains unclear whether this association is causal or merely a marker of more advanced disease. Furthermore, individual characteristics may limit the possibility of reaching the targeted dosage of specific agents. Herein, we provide a comprehensive overview of clinicians' adherence to heart failure guidelines in a specialized real-life setting, particularly regarding use and optimization of guideline-derived medical therapies, as well as the implementation of more recent agents such as sacubitril/valsartan and SGLT2 inhibitors. We seek potential explanations for suboptimal treatment and its impact on patient outcomes.