Key result
Virtual GDMT teams linked to ~0.6 higher GDMT optimization score at discharge vs usual care.
Why the study?
Implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HFrEF remains incomplete, and non-cardiovascular hospitalization may offer opportunities for optimization.
Does a virtual multidisciplinary GDMT Team improve guideline-directed medical therapy optimization scores at discharge in hospitalized patients with HFrEF?
Cohort (n=118)
Does a virtual multidisciplinary GDMT Team improve guideline-directed medical therapy optimization scores at discharge in hospitalized patients with HFrEF?
Effect estimate: Adjusted difference +0.58 (95% CI +0.09 to +1.07)
p-value: p=0.02
A virtual multidisciplinary GDMT team intervention during hospitalizations safely and effectively improved the prescription of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with HFrEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May increase GDMT optimization scores in hospitalized HFrEF; hypothesis-generating and requires RCT confirmation before practice change.
Bhatt et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (n=118). Virtual GDMT Team vs. Usual care was evaluated on GDMT optimization score (sum of positive and negative therapeutic changes at hospital discharge) (Adjusted difference +0.58, 95% CI +0.09 to +1.07, p=0.02). A virtual GDMT Team providing optimization suggestions significantly increased the GDMT optimization score at discharge compared to usual care (+0.58; 95% CI +0.09 to +1.07; P=0.02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: