Why the study?
Although medication profiles affect survival in older adults with heart failure, the effects of frailty and disability status remained underexplored.
Does the use of guideline-directed medical therapy, potentially inappropriate medications, or polypharmacy affect all-cause mortality in older adults with symptomatic heart failure, with or without frailty and disability?
Does the use of guideline-directed medical therapy, potentially inappropriate medications, or polypharmacy affect all-cause mortality in older adults with symptomatic heart failure, with or without frailty and disability?
In older adults with heart failure, guideline-directed medical therapy is consistently associated with reduced mortality regardless of frailty status, whereas potentially inappropriate medications increase mortality primarily in non-frail patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports GDMT across frailty strata in HF; leaves open causal PIM effects by disability status.
BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy, driven by guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and medications for comorbidities, including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), is common in older adults with heart failure (HF). Although medication profiles affect survival, the effects of frailty and disability status remain underexplored. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective study assessed polypharmacy (≥5 medications), the use of GDMT, and PIMs based on the Beers Criteria. Frailty and disability status were determined using Japan's Long-term Care Insurance (LTCI) certification. Patients were stratified according to LTCI, and the prognostic impact of medication profiles was analyzed. The total medication count was correlated with both GDMT and PIM use. Among 1,264 patients, those with LTCI were older, had more severe comorbidities, higher polypharmacy and PIM use, and lower use of GDMT medications. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, regardless of LTCI, GDMT medication use was associated with a favorable prognosis (LTCI: odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.258-0.866, P=0.015; no LTCI: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.400-0.799, P=0.001). PIM use was associated with a poor prognosis only in the no-LTCI group (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.040-2.203; P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Polypharmacy may have both beneficial and harmful effects, with prognostic implications potentially influenced by frailty and disability status. Although GDMT medications were consistently associated with favorable outcomes, the impact of PIMs appeared to differ depending on LTCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sekiya et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: