Specialty-Based Variability in Diagnosing and Managing Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

To quantify differences in the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) between cardiologists and noncardiologists, who often diagnose and manage HFpEF. Cardiologists and noncardiologists (internal medicine, medicine/pediatrics, family medicine, geriatrics) w...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Mayo Clinic proceedings Vol. 95; no. 4; pp. 669 - 675
Main Authors: Saxon, David T., Kennel, Peter J., Guyer, Heidi M., Goyal, Parag, Hummel, Scott L., Konerman, Matthew C.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England Elsevier Inc 01-04-2020
Frontline Medical Communications Inc
Elsevier Limited
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To quantify differences in the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) between cardiologists and noncardiologists, who often diagnose and manage HFpEF. Cardiologists and noncardiologists (internal medicine, medicine/pediatrics, family medicine, geriatrics) were anonymously surveyed between January 16, 2018, and March 2, 2018, regarding practices related to diagnosing and managing HFpEF at the University of Michigan and Weill Cornell Medical Center. Response data were compared using χ2 analysis. Of 1010 physicians surveyed, 211 completed a significant portion of the survey: 32 cardiologists and 179 noncardiologists. Most noncardiologists were unaware of HFpEF diagnostic guidelines and commonly used left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and natriuretic peptides to diagnose HFpEF. Noncardiologists (32.3%, n=52) were less likely than cardiologists (64.5%, n= 20) to prescribe an aldosterone antagonist for HFpEF (P=.001). Both groups reported similar use of β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and exercise programs. Noncardiologists were more likely to refer patients with HFrEF to cardiology (63.1%, n=111) compared with patients with HFpEF (33.5%, n=59; P<.001). Noncardiologists were more likely to discuss prognosis and goals of care with patients with HFrEF (84.4%, n=151) than with patients with HFpEF (65.9%, n=118; P<.001). Cardiologists and noncardiologists vary significantly in their HFpEF diagnosis and treatment practices. As diagnostic criteria continue to be evaluated for HFpEF, dissemination of these guidelines to noncardiologists, with an emphasis on the morbidity and mortality associated with HFpEF, is imperative.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0025-6196
1942-5546
DOI:10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.09.026