Key result
Four-pillar GDMT adoption increases ~24% per half-year from 2022 to 2024.
Why the study?
Whether dedicated tertiary heart-failure programmes in low- and middle-income countries can approach GDMT targets, and whether temporal trends reflect prescribing optimisation or case-mix shift, remains unresolved.
Does a dedicated tertiary heart-failure programme improve the adoption of four-pillar guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with HFrEF?
Cross-Sectional (n=319)
No
Does a dedicated tertiary heart-failure programme improve the adoption of four-pillar guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with HFrEF?
In an eastern Indian tertiary center, four-pillar GDMT adoption for HFrEF significantly increased from 48.6% to 76.3% over two years, primarily driven by SGLT2 inhibitor uptake.
Dedicated HF programmes may boost four-pillar GDMT uptake; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective trials before broader adoption.
BACKGROUND: Whether dedicated tertiary heart-failure programmes in low- and middle-income countries can approach guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) targets, and whether temporal trends reflect prescribing optimisation or case-mix shift, remains unresolved. We characterise four-pillar GDMT adoption in an eastern Indian tertiary centre with systematic robustness testing. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional analysis in a prospective HFrEF registry (2022-2024 primary cohort, n = 319 patients). Half-yearly adoption assessed by Cochran-Armitage trend tests (Benjamini-Hochberg FDR), MI-adjusted logistic regression (m = 20), and Bayesian regression. Robustness: delta-adjusted MI, tipping-point, FMI, sacubitril-valsartan target-dose, E-value, time-by-diabetes interaction, quarterly ITS at ≥ 8 bins. RESULTS: Four-pillar composite rose from 48.6% (H12022) to 76.3% (H2 2024); MI-adjusted OR per half-year 1.24 (95% CI 1.05-1.47; p = 0.013). SGLT2 inhibitor drove the composite (OR 1.51; 1.22-1.86; p < 0.001); RAAS-i 1.24, MRA 1.11 and beta-blocker 0.98 not significant. Bayesian regression concurred (SGLT2i posterior probability 0.972; four-pillar 0.896). SGLT2i trend was robust to delta-adjusted MI, tipping-point beyond +/- 50 mL/min/1.73 m^2, and unmeasured confounding (E-value point 1.76; CI lower 1.44). Time-by-diabetes interaction was null; sacubitril-valsartan target-dose attainment 20.0%. Quarterly ITS at ≥ 8 bins returned non-significant level and slope changes at every feasible policy event. CONCLUSIONS: Tertiary specialist care approached but did not reach the four-pillar prescription ceiling (76.3%; residual 23.7-percentage-point gap). The SGLT2i trend was robust to MNAR, unmeasured confounding, and diabetes case-mix shift; quarterly ITS at ≥ 8 bins detected no policy-event association. Sacubitril-valsartan target-dose attainment (20.0%), single-centre design, and fragile non-SGLT2i E-values constrain generalisability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suyash Tripathi (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (n=319). Temporal trend (half-yearly) was evaluated on Four-pillar composite adoption (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47, p=0.013). Four-pillar guideline-directed medical therapy adoption increased significantly over time, rising from 48.6% in H1 2022 to 76.3% in H2 2024 (OR per half-year 1.24; 95% CI 1.05-1.47; p=0.013).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: