{"title":"老年心力衰竭患者,伴或不伴虚弱和残疾的全因死亡率与综合用药、指导药物治疗和潜在不适当药物的相关性","authors":"Yuka Sekiya, Shinya Fujiki, Hiroki Tsuchiya, Takeshi Kashimura, Yuji Okura, Kunio Kodera, Hiroshi Watanabe, Kazuyoshi Takahashi, Shogo Bannai, Taturo Hatano, Takahiro Tanaka, Nobutaka Kitamura, Tohru Minamino, Takayuki Inomata","doi":"10.1253/circj.CJ-25-0200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polypharmacy, driven by guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and medications for comorbidities, including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), is common in older adults with heart failure (HF). Although medication profiles affect survival, the effects of frailty and disability status remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>This retrospective study assessed polypharmacy (≥5 medications), the use of GDMT, and PIMs based on the Beers Criteria. Frailty and disability status were determined using Japan's Long-term Care Insurance (LTCI) certification. Patients were stratified according to LTCI, and the prognostic impact of medication profiles was analyzed. The total medication count was correlated with both GDMT and PIM use. Among 1,264 patients, those with LTCI were older, had more severe comorbidities, higher polypharmacy and PIM use, and lower use of GDMT medications. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, regardless of LTCI, GDMT medication use was associated with a favorable prognosis (LTCI: odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.258-0.866, P=0.015; no LTCI: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.400-0.799, P=0.001). PIM use was associated with a poor prognosis only in the no-LTCI group (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.040-2.203; P=0.030).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Polypharmacy may have both beneficial and harmful effects, with prognostic implications potentially influenced by frailty and disability status. Although GDMT medications were consistently associated with favorable outcomes, the impact of PIMs appeared to differ depending on LTCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":50691,"journal":{"name":"Circulation Journal","volume":" ","pages":"1662-1671"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of Medication Profiles, Including Polypharmacy, Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy, and Potentially Inappropriate Medications, With All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults With Heart Failure, With or Without Frailty and Disability.\",\"authors\":\"Yuka Sekiya, Shinya Fujiki, Hiroki Tsuchiya, Takeshi Kashimura, Yuji Okura, Kunio Kodera, Hiroshi Watanabe, Kazuyoshi Takahashi, Shogo Bannai, Taturo Hatano, Takahiro Tanaka, Nobutaka Kitamura, Tohru Minamino, Takayuki Inomata\",\"doi\":\"10.1253/circj.CJ-25-0200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polypharmacy, driven by guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and medications for comorbidities, including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), is common in older adults with heart failure (HF). Although medication profiles affect survival, the effects of frailty and disability status remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>This retrospective study assessed polypharmacy (≥5 medications), the use of GDMT, and PIMs based on the Beers Criteria. Frailty and disability status were determined using Japan's Long-term Care Insurance (LTCI) certification. Patients were stratified according to LTCI, and the prognostic impact of medication profiles was analyzed. The total medication count was correlated with both GDMT and PIM use. Among 1,264 patients, those with LTCI were older, had more severe comorbidities, higher polypharmacy and PIM use, and lower use of GDMT medications. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, regardless of LTCI, GDMT medication use was associated with a favorable prognosis (LTCI: odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.258-0.866, P=0.015; no LTCI: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.400-0.799, P=0.001). PIM use was associated with a poor prognosis only in the no-LTCI group (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.040-2.203; P=0.030).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Polypharmacy may have both beneficial and harmful effects, with prognostic implications potentially influenced by frailty and disability status. Although GDMT medications were consistently associated with favorable outcomes, the impact of PIMs appeared to differ depending on LTCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50691,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1662-1671\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-25-0200\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-25-0200","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在指南导向药物治疗(GDMT)和合并症药物治疗(包括潜在不适当药物治疗(PIMs))的驱动下,多重用药在老年心力衰竭(HF)患者中很常见。虽然药物会影响生存,但虚弱和残疾状态的影响仍未得到充分探讨。方法和结果:本回顾性研究根据Beers标准评估了多药(≥5种药物)、GDMT和pim的使用。使用日本长期护理保险(LTCI)认证确定虚弱和残疾状态。根据LTCI对患者进行分层,并分析药物概况对预后的影响。总用药计数与GDMT和PIM的使用均相关。在1264例患者中,LTCI患者年龄较大,合并症更严重,多药和PIM使用较多,GDMT药物使用较少。在多因素Cox回归分析中,无论LTCI如何,GDMT用药与预后良好相关(LTCI:优势比[OR] 0.47, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.288 -0.866, P=0.015;无LTCI: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.400-0.799, P=0.001)。仅在非ltci组中,PIM使用与预后不良相关(OR 1.51;95% ci 1.040-2.203;P = 0.030)。结论:多药治疗可能既有有益的作用,也有有害的作用,其预后可能受到虚弱和残疾状况的影响。尽管GDMT药物一直与良好的结果相关,但pim的影响似乎因LTCI而异。
Association of Medication Profiles, Including Polypharmacy, Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy, and Potentially Inappropriate Medications, With All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults With Heart Failure, With or Without Frailty and Disability.
Background: Polypharmacy, driven by guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and medications for comorbidities, including potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), is common in older adults with heart failure (HF). Although medication profiles affect survival, the effects of frailty and disability status remain underexplored.
Methods and results: This retrospective study assessed polypharmacy (≥5 medications), the use of GDMT, and PIMs based on the Beers Criteria. Frailty and disability status were determined using Japan's Long-term Care Insurance (LTCI) certification. Patients were stratified according to LTCI, and the prognostic impact of medication profiles was analyzed. The total medication count was correlated with both GDMT and PIM use. Among 1,264 patients, those with LTCI were older, had more severe comorbidities, higher polypharmacy and PIM use, and lower use of GDMT medications. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, regardless of LTCI, GDMT medication use was associated with a favorable prognosis (LTCI: odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.258-0.866, P=0.015; no LTCI: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.400-0.799, P=0.001). PIM use was associated with a poor prognosis only in the no-LTCI group (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.040-2.203; P=0.030).
Conclusions: Polypharmacy may have both beneficial and harmful effects, with prognostic implications potentially influenced by frailty and disability status. Although GDMT medications were consistently associated with favorable outcomes, the impact of PIMs appeared to differ depending on LTCI.
期刊介绍:
Circulation publishes original research manuscripts, review articles, and other content related to cardiovascular health and disease, including observational studies, clinical trials, epidemiology, health services and outcomes studies, and advances in basic and translational research.