Key result
Complete four-pillar HF therapy reaches only 0.6% utilization with no mortality difference versus incomplete regimens.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to assess the utilization of the four-pillar guideline-directed medical regimen for heart failure and identify patient characteristics associated with its use in Jordan.
Observational (n=2,151)
Yes
There is an extremely low utilization (0.6%) of guideline-directed four-pillar medical therapy for heart failure in Jordan, highlighting a significant gap in real-world clinical practice.
Low four-pillar adherence showed no mortality link in this registry; leaves open real-world GDMT impact on HF survival.
Background Heart failure (HF) is a complex cardiovascular disease. Effective management typically involves four main medications: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, along with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). The primary objective of this article is to assess and identify the utilization of four-pillar regimen for HF managment and explore the characteristics of the patients being on the four-pillar regimen in Jordan. Methods Data from the Jordanian HF registry (JoHFR) was analyzed, encompassing records of HF patients treated in various cardiology centers from 2021 to 2023. Results The medical records of 2,151 patients with HF who were admitted to cardiology centers throughout Jordan were collected. Males comprised 58.0% of the included patients. Moreover, 71.0% of patients had chronic HF, whereas the rest, 29.0%, had acute HF. Of these, only 0.6% received the complete four-pillar treatment of HF. Beta-blockers were the most frequently used medication, prescribed to 74% of patients, while SGLT2i were the least common, used by only 9%. Notably, patients with type 2 diabetes were more likely to be on the four-pillar regimen (P-value = 0.016). Additionally, patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) below 60 were more likely to be treated using the four-pillar (P-values = 0.044). The analysis revealed no significant difference in mortality rates between the two groups (P-value = 0.475). Conclusion Our study demonstrated an overall low utilization of the four-pillar regimen for HF treatment in Jordan with several patients’ characteristics associated with it. This highlight the need for enhanced collaborative effort and governmental initiatives to address the challenges of the low utilization of these medications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Izraiq et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Heart failure (n=2,151). Four-pillar regimen vs. Non-four-pillar regimen was evaluated on Utilization of the complete four-pillar treatment. Among 2,151 heart failure patients in Jordan, only 0.6% received the complete four-pillar treatment regimen, with no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (P=0.475).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: