Clinical Inertia Among Outpatients With Heart Failure: Application of Treatment Nonintensification Taxonomy to EPIC-HF Trial

Stanley A. Swat, Laura J. Helmkamp, Caroline Tietbohl, Jocelyn S. Thompson, Monica Fitzgerald, Colleen K. McIlvennan, Geoffrey Harger, P. Michael Ho, Faraz S. Ahmad, Tariq Ahmad, Peter Buttrick, Larry A. Allen*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The contribution of clinical inertia to suboptimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unclear. Objectives: This study examined reasons for GDMT nonintensification and characterized clinical inertia. Methods: In this secondary analysis of EPIC-HF (Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction), a randomized clinical trial evaluating a patient-activation tool on GDMT utilization, we performed a sequential, explanatory mixed-methods study. Reasons for nonintensification among 4 medication classes were assigned according to an expanded published taxonomy using structured chart reviews. Audio transcripts of clinic encounters were analyzed to further characterize nonintensification reasons. Integration occurred during the interpretation phase. Results: Among 292 HFrEF patients who completed a cardiology visit, 185 (63.4%) experienced no treatment intensification, of whom 90 (48.6%) had at least 1 opportunity for intensification of a medication class with no documented contraindication or barriers (ie, clinical inertia). Nonintensification reasons varied by medication class, and included heightened risk of adverse effects (range 18.2%-31.6%), patient nonadherence (range 0.8%-1.1%), patient preferences and beliefs (range 0.6%-0.9%), comanagement with other providers (range 4.6%-5.6%), prioritization of other issues (range 15.6%-31.8%), multiple categories (range 16.5%-22.7%), and clinical inertia (range 22.7%-31.6%). A qualitative analysis of 32 clinic audio recordings demonstrated common characteristics of clinical inertia: 1) clinician review of medication regimens without education or intensification discussions; 2) patient stability as justification for nonintensification; and 3) shorter encounters for nonintensification vs intensification. Conclusions: In this comprehensive study exploring HFrEF prescribing, clinical inertia is a main contributor to nonintensification within an updated taxonomy classification for suboptimal GDMT prescribing. This approach should help target strategies overcoming GDMT underuse.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1579-1591
Number of pages13
JournalJACC: Heart Failure
Volume11
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2023

Funding

The authors would like to thank Dr Allan Prochazka for his valuable feedback on this study.

Keywords

  • clinical inertia
  • guideline-directed medical therapy
  • heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
  • left ventricular dysfunction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical Inertia Among Outpatients With Heart Failure: Application of Treatment Nonintensification Taxonomy to EPIC-HF Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this