↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Medical Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction The CHAMP-HF Registry

Overview of attention for article published in JACC, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
822 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
459 Mendeley
Title
Medical Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction The CHAMP-HF Registry
Published in
JACC, July 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.04.070
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen J. Greene, Javed Butler, Nancy M. Albert, Adam D. DeVore, Puza P. Sharma, Carol I. Duffy, C. Larry Hill, Kevin McCague, Xiaojuan Mi, J. Herbert Patterson, John A. Spertus, Laine Thomas, Fredonia B. Williams, Adrian F. Hernandez, Gregg C. Fonarow

Abstract

Guidelines strongly recommend patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) be treated with multiple medications proven to improve clinical outcomes, as tolerated. The degree to which gaps in medication use and dosing persist in contemporary outpatient practice is unclear. This study sought to characterize patterns and factors associated with use and dose of HFrEF medications in current practice. The CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry included outpatients in the United States with chronic HFrEF receiving at least 1 oral medication for management of HF. Patients were characterized by baseline use and dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA). Patient-level factors associated with medication use were examined. Overall, 3,518 patients from 150 primary care and cardiology practices were included. Mean age was 66 ± 13 years, 29% were female, and mean EF was 29 ± 8%. Among eligible patients, 27%, 33%, and 67% were not prescribed ACEI/ARB/ARNI, beta-blocker, and MRA therapy, respectively. When medications were prescribed, few patients were receiving target doses of ACEI/ARB (17%), ARNI (14%), and beta-blocker (28%), whereas most patients were receiving target doses of MRA therapy (77%). Among patients eligible for all classes of medication, 1% were simultaneously receiving target doses of ACE/ARB/ARNI, beta-blocker, and MRA. In adjusted models, older age, lower blood pressure, more severe functional class, renal insufficiency, and recent HF hospitalization generally favored lower medication utilization or dose. Social and economic characteristics were not independently associated with medication use or dose. In this contemporary outpatient HFrEF registry, significant gaps in use and dose of guideline-directed medical therapy remain. Multiple clinical factors were associated with medication use and dose prescribed. Strategies to improve guideline-directed use of HFrEF medications remain urgently needed, and these findings may inform targeted approaches to optimize outpatient medical therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 168 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 459 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 459 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 57 12%
Other 49 11%
Student > Postgraduate 29 6%
Student > Master 28 6%
Student > Bachelor 28 6%
Other 67 15%
Unknown 201 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 154 34%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 3%
Engineering 9 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 2%
Other 30 7%
Unknown 221 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 409. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2024.
All research outputs
#73,621
of 25,753,031 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#174
of 16,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,534
of 342,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#6
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,753,031 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,690 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.