Missed opportunities in medical therapy for patients with heart failure in an electronically-identified cohort

BACKGROUND

National registries reveal significant gaps in medical therapy for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but may not accurately (or fully) characterize the population eligible for therapy.

OBJECTIVE

We developed an automated, electronic health record-based algorithm to identify HFrEF patients eligible for evidence-based therapy, and extracted treatment data to assess gaps in therapy in a large, diverse health system.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study of all NYU Langone Health outpatients with EF ≤ 40% on echocardiogram and an outpatient visit from 3/1/2019 to 2/29/2020, we assessed prescription of the following therapies: beta-blocker (BB), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA). Our algorithm accounted for contraindications such as medication allergy, bradycardia, hypotension, renal dysfunction, and hyperkalemia.

RESULTS

We electronically identified 2732 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Among those eligible for each medication class, 84.8% and 79.7% were appropriately prescribed BB and ACE-I/ARB/ARNI, respectively, while only 23.9% and 22.7% were appropriately prescribed MRA and ARNI, respectively. In adjusted models, younger age, cardiology visit and lower EF were associated with increased prescribing of medications. Private insurance and Medicaid were associated with increased prescribing of ARNI (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.02-2.00; and OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.07-2.67).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed substantial shortfalls in prescribing of MRA and ARNI therapy to ambulatory HFrEF patients. Subspecialty care setting, and Medicaid insurance were associated with higher rates of ARNI prescribing. Further studies are warranted to prospectively evaluate provider- and policy-level interventions to improve prescribing of these evidence-based therapies.

Evaluation of mortality in bundle branch block patients from an electronic cohort: Clinical Outcomes in Digital Electrocardiography (CODE) study

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch block is recognized as a marker of higher risk of death, but the prognostic value of the right bundle branch block in the general population is still controversial. Our aim is to evaluate the risk of overall and cardiovascular mortality in patients with right (RBBB) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) in a large electronic cohort of Brazilian patients.

METHODS

This observational retrospective study was developed with the database of digital ECGs from Telehealth Network of Minas Gerais, Brazil (TNMG). All ECGs performed from 2010 to 2017 in primary care patients over 16 years old were assessed. The electronic cohort was obtained by linking data from ECG exams (name, sex, date of birth, city of residence) and those from national mortality information system, using standard probabilistic linkage methods (FRIL: Fine-grained record linkage software, v.2.1.5, Atlanta, GA). Only the first ECG of each patient was considered. Clinical data were self-reported, and ECGs were interpreted manually by cardiologists and automatically by the Glasgow University Interpreter software. Hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was estimated using Cox regression.

RESULTS

From a dataset of 1,773,689 patients, 1,558,421 primary care patients over 16 years old underwent a valid ECG recording during 2010 to 2017. We excluded 17,359 patients that didn't have a valid QRS measure from the Glasgow program and 11,091 patients from the control group that had QRS equal or above 120 ms and were not RBBB or LBBB. Therefore, 1,529,971 were included (median age 52 [Q1:38; Q3:65] years; 40.2% were male). In a mean follow-up of 3.7 years, the overall mortality rate was 3.34%. RBBB was more frequent (2.42%) than LBBB (1.32%). In multivariate analysis, adjusting for sex, age and comorbidities, both patients with RBBB (HR 1.32; CI 95% 1.27-1.37) and LBBB (HR 1.69; CI 95% 1.62-1.76) had higher risk of overall mortality. Women with RBBB had an increased risk of all-cause death compared to men (p < 0.001). Cardiovascular mortality was higher in patients with LBBB (HR 1.77; CI 95% 1.55-2.01), but not for RBBB.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RBBB and LBBB had higher risk of overall mortality. Women with RBBB had more risk of all-cause death than men. LBBB was associated with higher risk of cardiovascular mortality.