Incidence and prevalence of heart failure in elderly persons, 1994-2003

Center for Clinical and Genetic Economics, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC 27715, USA.
Archives of Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 13.25). 03/2008; 168(4):418-24. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2007.80
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recent analyses have presented conflicting evidence regarding the incidence and prevalence of heart failure in the United States. We sought to estimate the annual incidence and prevalence of heart failure and associated survival in elderly persons from January 1, 1994, through December 31, 2003.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 622,789 Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older who were diagnosed as having heart failure between 1994 and 2003. The main outcome measures were incidence and prevalence of heart failure and survival following a heart failure diagnosis.
The incidence of heart failure declined from 32 per 1000 person-years in 1994 to 29 per 1000 person-years in 2003 (P < .01). Incidence declined most sharply among beneficiaries aged 80 to 84 years (from 57.5 to 48.4 per 1000 person-years, P < .01) and increased slightly among beneficiaries aged 65 to 69 years (from 17.5 to 19.3 per 1000 person-years, P < .01). Although risk-adjusted mortality declined slightly from 1994 to 2003, the prognosis for patients diagnosed as having heart failure remains poor. In 2002, risk-adjusted 1-year mortality was 27.5%, more than 3 times higher than for age- and sex-matched patients.
Although the incidence of heart failure has declined somewhat during the past decade, modest survival gains have resulted in an increase in the number of patients living with heart failure. Identifying optimal strategies for the treatment and management of heart failure will become increasingly important as the size of the Medicare population grows.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT Background: Systolic heart failure is the final manifestation of several cardiovascular conditions. The 2001 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines depicting the progression of heart failure (HF) from stage A through stage D are aimed at the early treatment of risk factors. However, treatment is often delayed until stage C, and as a result HF continues to impose a major burden on our healthcare industry. Methods: We conducted an extensive literature review of the MEDLINE/PubMed database with the purpose of elucidating knowledge gaps and misconceptions regarding systolic HF. Results: Long-term beta adrenergic blocking is the only pharmacologic intervention that reverses left ventricular remodeling. Whether beta adrenergic blocking prevents or delays left ventricular remodeling in patients at risk of HF is presently unknown. A knowledge gap also exists regarding the phenotype of patients that derives a mortality benefit from implantable cardioverter defibrillator th
    Ochsner Journal 12/2014; 14(4):569-575. DOI:10.1043/1524-5012-14.4.569
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic heart failure is a major public-health problem with a high prevalence, complex treatment, and high mortality. A careful and comprehensive analysis is needed to provide optimal (and personalized) therapy to heart failure patients. The main 4 non-invasive imaging techniques (echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, multi-detector-computed tomography, and nuclear imaging) provide information on cardiovascular anatomy and function, which form the basis of the assessment of the pathophysiology underlying heart failure. The selection of imaging modalities depends on the information that is needed for the clinical management of the patients: (1) underlying etiology (ischemic vs non-ischemic); (2) in ischemic patients, need for revascularization should be evaluated (myocardial ischemia/viability?); (3) left ventricular function and shape assessment; (4) presence of significant secondary mitral regurgitation; (5) device therapy with cardiac resynchronization therapy and/or implantable cardiac defibrillator (risk of sudden cardiac death). This review is dedicated to assessment of myocardial viability, however "isolated assessment of myocardial viability" may be clinically not meaningful and should be considered among all those different variables. This complete information will enable personalized treatment of the patient with ischemic heart failure.
    Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 03/2015; 22(2). DOI:10.1007/s12350-015-0096-5 · 2.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Frail hospitalized older adults are at risk for adverse outcomes. Previous studies have suggested benefits for inpatient geriatric management (GEM). We sought to determine whether hospitalized patients with a history of heart failure (HF) benefitted from inpatient GEM or not.Methods We studied 309 inpatients previously diagnosed with HF who were participants in a randomized trial of geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) versus usual care (UC). The intervention involved multidisciplinary teams that provided comprehensive geriatric assessment. We evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQOL), basic activities of daily living (ADLs), health service utilization, and survival at discharge, 6 months, and 1 year post randomization.ResultsGEM patients had higher mean change scores for physical function (unadjusted means: 0.17 vs. –4.67, p = 0.046) and basic ADLs (1.25 vs. 0.67, p = 0.003) at hospital discharge, which remained significant after adjusting for baseline HRQOL scores and in-hospital days. Outcomes were not significantly different at 1 year. Length of stay for GEM was greater than UC (24 days vs. 17 days, p = 0.03), but total costs at 1 year were not different (p = 0.9). Mortality rates at 1 year were high and similar (GEM 29.0%, UC 27.3%, p = 0.73) in both the groups.Conclusion Inpatient GEM was associated with better maintenance of physical function and basic ADLs at hospital discharge; however, no differences in HRQOL or survival were observed between GEM and UC at 1 year post randomization. Restructuring inpatient care models to incorporate inpatient GEM principles may be one method to optimize health-care delivery.
    International Journal of Gerontology 06/2012; 6(2):112-116. DOI:10.1016/j.ijge.2012.01.012 · 0.47 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Available from
May 28, 2014