Abstract
Background
Diagnosing heart failure (HF) in primary care can be challenging, especially in elderly patients with comorbidities. Insight in the prevalence, age, comorbidity and routine practice of diagnosing HF in general practice may improve the process of diagnosing HF.
Aim
To examine the prevalence of HF in relation to ageing and comorbidities, and routine practice of diagnosing HF in general practice.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from electronic health records of 56 320 adult patients of 11 general practices. HF patients were compared with patients without HF using descriptive analyses and χ 2 tests. The following comorbidities were considered: chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD), diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, anaemia and renal function disorder (RFD). Separate analyses were performed for men and women.
Findings
The point prevalence of HF was 1.2% (95% confidence interval 1.13–1.33) and increased with each age category from 0.04% (18–44 years) to 20.9% (⩾85 years). All studied comorbidities were significantly (P<0.001) more common in HF patients than in patients without HF: COPD (24.1% versus 3.1%), DM (34.7% versus 6.5%), hypertension (52.7% versus 16.0%), anaemia (10.9% versus 2.3%) and RFD (61.8% versus 7.5%). N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) was recorded in 38.1% of HF patients.
Conclusions
HF is highly associated with ageing and comorbidities. Diagnostic use of NT-proBNP in routine primary care seems underutilized. Instruction of GPs to determine NT-proBNP in patients suspected of HF is recommended, especially In elderly patients with comorbidities.
Key words: cohort study, comorbidities, diagnosis, heart failure, prevalence, primary health care
Introduction
Heart failure (HF) affects an estimated 26 million people worldwide (Ambrosy et al., 2014) and this number is expected to be increasing due to the ageing population and improved survival following acute cardiac events (Hobbs et al., 2002; Bleumink et al., 2004). Furthermore, the number of patients with risk factors for HF, in particular obesity and diabetes, is also increasing. Therefore, the prevalence of HF will probably increase in the near future (Danielsen et al., 2017). Bleumink et al. (2004) and Hobbs et al. (2002) further appoint that HF is associated with a significant burden on quality of life, morbidity and mortality, with only 35% of patients surviving five years after diagnosis. Due to the poor prognosis and high morbidity, it causes high health-care-related costs. In 2011, the estimated costs were 940 million euro in the Netherlands, which was 1.1% of the total healthcare costs. Nearly 50% went to hospital care and 45% to nursing homes and home care (Rutten et al., 2016).
HF is a complex and progressive syndrome in which the cardiac output is insufficient to meet the demands of the body due to an abnormality in cardiac structure or function, leading to a variety of symptoms and signs (Hoes et al., 2010; Yancy et al., 2013; Ponipowski et al., 2016). HF patients are frequently managed by general practitioners (GPs), which means every GP will encounter HF patients in their practice (Hoes et al., 1998). Diagnosing HF is difficult, because many of the symptoms are non-discriminating and, therefore, of limited diagnostic value (Remes et al., 1991; Mant et al., 2009). Moreover, HF is frequently associated with comorbidities, hampering clinical assessment. According to the Dutch HF guidelines, the main (physical) comorbidities associated with HF are chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, anaemia and renal function disorder (RFD). These comorbidities may lead to or maintain HF (Hoes et al., 2010).
According to the current international and Dutch HF guidelines, GPs can use the plasma concentration of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) as an initial diagnostic test (Hoes et al., 2010; Yancy et al., 2013; Ponipowski et al., 2016). Ponipowski et al. (2016) further recommend echocardiography to establish the diagnosis in patients with suspected HF. In the Netherlands, the GP fulfills a role as gatekeeper, which means that referrals to specialists are largely controlled by GPs. Until recently, Dutch GPs needed to refer patients with suspected HF to the cardiologist for echocardiography. Nowadays, they can order it directly.
Insight in the occurrence of HF in relation to age and comorbidity in routine general practice may improve the process of diagnosing HF. Therefore, the aim of our study is to examine the current prevalence of HF in relation to ageing, and the occurrence of the main comorbidities in patients with HF, separately for men and women as diagnosed by GPs in routine daily practice. In addition, we want to describe the process of diagnosing HF in routine primary care based on electronic health record (EHR) data. Insight in the routine diagnostic process may be helpful to improve care for this vulnerable group of patients.
Methods
Design and study population
We conducted a retrospective cohort study, using data of patients of eleven general practices participating in a Primary Care Practice Based Research Network, the Nijmeegs Monitoring Project (NMP, 2011). GPs and practice nurses of these general practices record data on care, disease and comorbidity. The data provided by the NMP are first encoded and subsequently delivered to the Department of Primary and Community Care in the Radboud University Medical Center (Radboudumc) Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Patients of NMP general practices are aware that their encoded data can be used in research by the Radboudumc, and are given the opportunity to object at any time (NMP, 2011).
Our study population consists of all adult patients (⩾18 years of age) that were signed up at the general practice at some point between 01/01/2010 and 31/12/2014. To answer our research questions, we created two groups. The first group, called the prevalence group (PG), consists of all patients that were present on 31/12/2014 to estimate the point prevalence. The second group, the diagnosis group (DG), consists of all adult patients (including the PG group).
Heart failure, chronic comorbidities and clinical tests
HF is encoded using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) version 1 (ICPC1) or version 2 (ICPC2) complemented with the International Classification of Diseases-10. These ICPC codes are used to register morbidities as well as test results during anamnesis (e.g., heart murmur). Patients were defined as having HF when the ICPC code started with K77. When HF was recorded more than once, we selected the first valid date of diagnosis, since we considered HF a chronic disease. This also applied to the included – chronic – comorbidities.
Demographic information included gender and age, which was categorized (18–44/45–54/55–64/65–74/75–84/⩾85). Since HF rarely occurs in patients younger than 44 years, the first category was aggregated. The other categories were chosen to show the (expected) correlation between higher age and the occurrence of HF. In the PG, the mean age was calculated on 31/12/2014. In the DG we included patients with and without HF, so it was not possible to calculate the mean age at the time of diagnosis. The mean age was therefore calculated on 01/01/2010.
The following chronic comorbidities were included: COPD, DM, hypertension, anaemia and RFD (Hoes et al., 2010). The ICPC codes used for these comorbidities are presented in Table 1. For RFD we additionally included the laboratory test for renal disease: estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR). When eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 was present, the patient was added as a patient with RFD.
Table 1.
Overview of included variables in diagnosis group (Dutch College of General Practitioners 2016)
| Measurement code(s) | Outcome | Coding ICPC1 | ICPC2 | ICD10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comorbidities | |||||
| COPD | – | – | R95 | R95 | – |
| DM | – | – | T90.01 T90.02 | T89 T90 | E10 E11–E14 |
| Hypertension | – | – | K85 K86 K87 | K85 K86 K87 | – |
| Anaemia | – | – | B80 | B80 | – |
| RFD | 1919 | Normal (⩾60 mL/min×1.73 m2)/reduced (<60 mL/min×1.73 m2) | U99.01 | U99 | N19 |
| Symptoms | |||||
| Dyspnoea | 1659 | Yes/no/unclear | R02 | R02 | – |
| Orthopnoea | 3010 | Yes/no/unclear | – | – | – |
| Fatigue | 3256 | Absent/present/unclear | – | – | – |
| Anginal symptoms | 1595 | Yes/no/unclear | – | – | – |
| Signs | |||||
| Pulmonary crepitations | 1868 2026 | Normal/aberrant/unclear Crepitations/rhonchi/extended expirium/eliminated breathing sounds/remaining | – | – | – |
| Peripheral oedema | 3007 | Yes/no/unclear | K07 | K07 | – |
| Elevated central venous pressure | 3000 | Free text | – | – | – |
| Enlarged liver | 3005 | Free text | D96 | D23 | – |
| Ascites | – | D29.01 | D29 | R18 | |
| Widened ictus cordis | 2062 | Inside midclavicular line/outside midclavicular line/unclear | – | – | – |
| Heart murmur | 2060 2061 | Normal/aberrant/unclear Free text | K81 | K81 | – |
| Additional clinical tests | |||||
| BNP | 1966 | Normal (<10 pmol/L)/elevated (⩾10 pmol/L) | – | – | – |
| NT-proBNP | 1968 | Normal (<15 pmol/L)/elevated (⩾15 pmol/L) | – | – | – |
| Chest X-ray | 2321 | Free text | – | – | – |
| Electrocardiography | 2202 | Free text | – | – | – |
| Echocardiography | 3001 | Free text | – | – | – |
ICPC=International Classification of Primary Care; ICD=International Classification of Diseases; COPD=chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; DM=diabetes mellitus; RFD=renal function disorder; BNP=brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP=N-terminal pro-BNP.
Routine practice of the diagnostic procedure in general practice was described according to the three pillars in the algorithm from the HF guidelines: clinical symptoms in anamnesis, signs during physical examination and additional clinical tests (Hoes et al., 2010; Yancy et al., 2013; Ponipowski et al., 2016). This information was available in ICPC codes, measurements and/or free text (Table 1). We had no access to free text due to privacy regulations (Krabben, 2005). The measurements were only available from 2008 and onwards and comprised two elements: (1) whether the measurements were recorded or not and (2) the outcome of the measurement: suspected for HF or not. Of these, we selected the first outcomes of the symptoms and signs that were suspected for HF. This meant that an aberrant value overrode a normal value. This also applied to the outcomes of the additional test results: an elevated value overrode a normal value. The cut-off points used for BNP/NT-proBNP were 10 and 15 pmol/L, respectively (Hoes et al., 2010). ICPC codes and measurements recorded in <15 patients were not included.
Statistical methods
The point prevalence in the PG was estimated on 31/12/2014. We estimated this in men and women separately, and categorized by age. In order to determine whether correction for clustering was necessary, we calculated the intracluster correlation coefficient, which was virtually zero (0,00000395). Therefore, we did not correct for clustering. The Wilson’s score interval was used to measure the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). In the DG, we determined the comorbidities in patients with and without HF and categorized by gender and age. A χ 2 test was used to analyze differences in comorbidities between patients with and without HF. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. We also used the DG to describe the process of diagnosing. As mentioned previously, all ICPC codes assigned in the past were available, but measurements were only available from 2008 and onwards. In addition, the current Dutch guideline for HF is from 2010. For these reasons, we composed two groups: no HF and HF diagnosed in 2010 or later. Finally, we analyzed the symptoms, signs and additional clinical tests for each group and the total group (including additionally HF before 2010). First, we determined whether ICPC codes were present or not and whether measurements were recorded or not. Second, we determined if the outcomes were suspected for HF or not in the HF group. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 22 was used for statistical analysis. Characteristics of the PG and the DG were provided using descriptive statistics.
Results
Point prevalence of heart failure
On 31/12/2014, 605 of the eligible patients in our PG (n=49 362) were diagnosed with HF. The overall point prevalence of HF in the adult population was 1.3% (95% CI: 1.14–1.42) in men and 1.2% (95% CI: 1.06–1.33) in women (Table 2). The point prevalence in men and women increased with each age category, starting with 0.04% (95% CI: 0.02–0.07) in patients younger than 44 years and increasing to 20.9% (95% CI: 17.96–24.08) in patients aged 85 years or older. Until 54 years, men and women showed comparable point prevalences. The point prevalence in men aged 55–64 years was 1.0% (95% CI: 0.75–1.38) and in women 0.6% (95% CI: 0.37–0.84). Similar results were found in patients aged 65–74 years: 2.9% (95% CI: 2.37–3.57) and 1.5% (95% CI: 1.15–2.03), respectively. In patients aged 85 years or older, the point prevalence was 21.8% (95% CI: 16.98–27.52) and 20.4% (95% CI: 16.87–24.36), respectively.
Table 2.
Prevalence (%) of heart failure in the adult population (prevalence group)
| Men | Women | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | n | Prevalence % (95% CI) | n | Prevalence % (95% CI) | n | Prevalence % (95% CI) |
| 18–44 | 4 | 0.04 (0.01–0.10) | 4 | 0.04 (0.01–0.09) | 8 | 0.04 (0.02–0.07) |
| 45–54 | 18 | 0.4 (0.23–0.57) | 16 | 0.3 (0.20–0.53) | 34 | 0.3 (0.25–0.48) |
| 55–64 | 41 | 1.0 (0.75–1.38) | 23 | 0.6 (0.37–0.84) | 64 | 0.8 (0.62–1.00) |
| 65–74 | 88 | 2.9 (2.37–3.57) | 46 | 1.5 (1.15–2.03) | 134 | 2.2 (1.88–2.62) |
| 75–84 | 108 | 8.2 (6.69–9.85) | 116 | 7.9 (6.59–9.34) | 224 | 8.0 (7.08–9.10) |
| ⩾85 | 51 | 21.8 (16.98–27.52) | 90 | 20.4 (16.87–24.36) | 141 | 20.9 (17.96–24.08) |
| Total | 310 | 1.3 (1.14–1.42) | 295 | 1.2 (1.06–1.33) | 605 | 1.2 (1.13–1.33) |
CI=confidence interval.
Comorbidities in heart failure patients
From the DG, three patients were excluded for whom no date of diagnosis was known, leading to a total of 56 320 patients. Of this group, 55 224 patients had no HF and 525 patients were diagnosed with HF in 2010 or later. COPD (24.1%), DM (34.7%), hypertension (52.7%), anaemia (10.9%) and RFD (61.8%) were highly common in patients with HF (Table 3). These comorbidities were significantly lower in patients without HF (P<0.001). Similar results applied to both men and women (P<0.001). COPD was seen in 30.3% of men and in 18.0% of women with HF. The opposite applied to hypertension, which was seen in 57.2% of women and 47.9% of men with HF, and RFD, which was seen in 67.3% of women and 56.1% of men with HF. In addition, statistical significance was calculated for each age category, which is also shown in Table 3. The number of each comorbidity increased with each age category, with a peak around 65–74 or 75–84 years, and decreased in patients aged 85 years or older. Exceptions were RFD and anaemia, which had the highest numbers in patients aged 85 years or older. Moreover, anaemia was seen most in women aged 45–54 years without HF (4.4%) and in women aged 55–64 years with HF (13.7%). Figure 1 shows comorbidities in patients with and without HF per age category.
Table 3.
Comorbidities in patients with and without heart failure (HF)
| Men (n=27 556) | Women (n=28 764) | Total (n=56 320) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No HF (n=27 019) | HF (n=537) | No HF (n=28 205) | HF (n=559) | No HF (n=55 224) | HF (n=1096) | ||||||||||
| n | % | n | % | P-value | n | % | n | % | P-value | n | % | n | % | P-value | |
| COPD | 937 | 3.5 | 163 | 30.3 | <0.001 | 801 | 2.8 | 101 | 18.0 | <0.001 | 1738 | 3.1 | 264 | 24.1 | <0.001 |
| 18–44 | 64 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 | 55 | 0.4 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 | 119 | 0.4 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 |
| 45–54 | 145 | 2.9 | 4 | 12.9 | 0.012 | 172 | 3.3 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 | 317 | 3.1 | 4 | 7.8 | 0.074 |
| 55–64 | 260 | 6.1 | 24 | 29.6 | <0.001 | 277 | 6.6 | 13 | 25.5 | <0.001 | 537 | 6.3 | 37 | 28.0 | <0.001 |
| 65–74 | 286 | 11.6 | 44 | 29.5 | <0.001 | 175 | 6.9 | 29 | 28.4 | <0.001 | 461 | 9.2 | 73 | 29.1 | <0.001 |
| 75–84 | 162 | 16.8 | 72 | 35.8 | <0.001 | 98 | 8.2 | 37 | 17.5 | <0.001 | 260 | 12.0 | 109 | 26.4 | <0.001 |
| ⩾85 | 20 | 12.0 | 19 | 28.8 | 0.002 | 24 | 6.9 | 22 | 13.3 | 0.018 | 44 | 8.6 | 41 | 17.7 | <0.001 |
| DM | 1920 | 7.1 | 181 | 33.6 | <0.001 | 1660 | 5.9 | 199 | 35.5 | <0.001 | 3580 | 6.5 | 380 | 34.7 | <0.001 |
| 18–44 | 200 | 1.4 | 2 | 22.2 | 0.007 | 192 | 1.3 | 1 | 11.1 | 0.11 | 392 | 1.4 | 3 | 16.7 | 0.002 |
| 45–54 | 341 | 6.8 | 11 | 35.5 | <0.001 | 236 | 4.5 | 2 | 10.0 | 0.23 | 577 | 5.6 | 13 | 25.5 | <0.001 |
| 55–64 | 601 | 14.0 | 24 | 29.6 | <0.001 | 414 | 9.8 | 19 | 37.3 | <0.001 | 1015 | 11.9 | 43 | 32.6 | <0.001 |
| 65–74 | 505 | 20.5 | 58 | 38.9 | <0.001 | 470 | 18.6 | 40 | 39.2 | <0.001 | 975 | 19.5 | 98 | 39.0 | <0.001 |
| 75–84 | 234 | 24.2 | 72 | 35.8 | 0.001 | 273 | 22.8 | 92 | 43.4 | <0.001 | 507 | 23.5 | 164 | 39.7 | <0.001 |
| ⩾85 | 39 | 23.5 | 14 | 21.2 | 0.71 | 75 | 21.7 | 45 | 27.3 | 0.16 | 114 | 22.3 | 59 | 25.5 | 0.33 |
| Hypertension | 4022 | 14.9 | 257 | 47.9 | <0.001 | 4822 | 17.1 | 321 | 57.2 | <0.001 | 8844 | 16.0 | 578 | 52.7 | <0.001 |
| 18–44 | 362 | 2.6 | 2 | 22.2 | 0.21 | 491 | 3.3 | 3 | 33.3 | 0.003 | 853 | 3.0 | 5 | 27.8 | <0.001 |
| 45–54 | 745 | 14.8 | 11 | 35.5 | 0.004 | 848 | 16.3 | 7 | 35.0 | 0.033 | 1593 | 15.5 | 18 | 35.3 | <0.001 |
| 55–64 | 1305 | 30.4 | 41 | 50.6 | <0.001 | 1294 | 30.6 | 21 | 41.2 | 0.073 | 2599 | 30.5 | 62 | 47.0 | <0.001 |
| 65–74 | 1053 | 42.8 | 69 | 46.3 | 0.39 | 1241 | 49.0 | 55 | 53.9 | 0.33 | 2294 | 45.9 | 124 | 49.4 | 0.28 |
| 75–84 | 487 | 50.5 | 105 | 52.2 | 0.65 | 739 | 61.8 | 136 | 64.2 | 0.51 | 1226 | 56.7 | 241 | 58.4 | 0.54 |
| ⩾85 | 70 | 42.2 | 29 | 43.9 | 0.81 | 209 | 60.4 | 99 | 60.0 | 0.93 | 279 | 54.5 | 128 | 55.4 | 0.82 |
| Anaemia | 241 | 0.9 | 56 | 10.4 | <0.001 | 1024 | 3.6 | 63 | 11.2 | <0.001 | 1265 | 2.3 | 119 | 10.9 | <0.001 |
| 18–44 | 27 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 | 534 | 3.6 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 | 561 | 1.9 | 0 | 0.0 | >0.99 |
| 45–54 | 41 | 0.8 | 2 | 6.5 | 0.028 | 231 | 4.4 | 2 | 10.0 | 0.22 | 272 | 2.7 | 4 | 7.8 | 0.047 |
| 55–64 | 44 | 1.0 | 7 | 8.6 | <0.001 | 108 | 2.6 | 7 | 13.7 | <0.001 | 152 | 1.8 | 14 | 10.6 | <0.001 |
| 65–74 | 74 | 3.0 | 16 | 10.7 | <0.001 | 71 | 2.8 | 10 | 9.8 | 0.001 | 145 | 2.9 | 26 | 10.4 | <0.001 |
| 75–84 | 42 | 4.4 | 21 | 10.4 | 0.001 | 62 | 5.2 | 20 | 9.4 | 0.15 | 104 | 4.8 | 41 | 9.9 | <0.001 |
| ⩾85 | 13 | 7.8 | 10 | 15.2 | 0.09 | 18 | 5.2 | 24 | 14.5 | <0.001 | 31 | 6.1 | 34 | 14.7 | <0.001 |
| RFD | 1704 | 6.3 | 301 | 56.1 | <0.001 | 2464 | 8.7 | 376 | 67.3 | <0.001 | 4168 | 7.5 | 677 | 61.8 | <0.001 |
| 18–44 | 92 | 0.7 | 2 | 22.2 | 0.002 | 113 | 0.8 | 2 | 22.2 | 0.002 | 205 | 0.7 | 4 | 22.2 | <0.001 |
| 45–54 | 150 | 3.0 | 7 | 22.6 | <0.001 | 277 | 5.3 | 5 | 25.0 | 0.003 | 427 | 4.2 | 12 | 23.5 | <0.001 |
| 55–64 | 416 | 9.7 | 35 | 43.2 | <0.001 | 596 | 14.1 | 25 | 49.0 | <0.001 | 1012 | 11.9 | 60 | 45.5 | <0.001 |
| 65–74 | 565 | 22.9 | 71 | 47.7 | <0.001 | 724 | 28.6 | 64 | 62.7 | <0.001 | 1289 | 25.8 | 135 | 53.8 | <0.001 |
| 75–84 | 398 | 41.2 | 134 | 66.7 | <0.001 | 576 | 48.2 | 153 | 72.2 | <0.001 | 974 | 45.1 | 287 | 69.5 | <0.001 |
| ⩾85 | 83 | 50.0 | 52 | 78.8 | <0.001 | 178 | 51.4 | 127 | 77.0 | <0.001 | 261 | 51.0 | 179 | 77.5 | <0.001 |
COPD=chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; DM=diabetes mellitus; RFD=renal function disorder. Bold P-values are statistically significant.
Figure 1.
Bar graph of comorbidities in patients with and without heart failure per age category HF=heart failure; COPD=chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Process of diagnosing heart failure
Of all symptoms, the ICPC code for dyspnoea was recorded in 21.9% of patients with HF and in 3.4% of patients without HF (Table 4). Anginal symptoms were recorded in 28.2 and 9.6%, respectively. Of the signs, the ICPC code for peripheral oedema was recorded in 27.2% of patients with HF and in 3.2% of patients without HF. Of the additional tests, NT-proBNP was recorded in 38.1% of patients with HF and in 3.5% of patients without HF. Anginal symptoms and auscultation of the lungs were suspected for HF in 15.5 and 54.8% of the cases, respectively (not in Table). NT-proBNP was elevated in 93.5% of the cases (not in Table).
Table 4.
Recorded symptoms, signs and additional tests in patients with and without heart failure (HF)
| No HF | HF diagnosed in 2010 or later | Total (diagnosis group) a | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n=55 224 | 98.1% | n=525 | 0.9% | n=56 320 | 100% | |
| Symptoms | ||||||
| Dyspnoea ICPC | 1870 | 3.4 | 115 | 21.9 | 2071 | 3.7 |
| Dyspnoea anamnesis | 423 | 0.8 | 11 | 2.1 | 444 | 0.8 |
| Anginal symptoms | 5294 | 9.6 | 148 | 28.2 | 5576 | 9.9 |
| Signs | ||||||
| Auscultation lungs | 1166 | 2.1 | 31 | 5.9 | 1227 | 2.2 |
| Abnormalities auscultation lungs | 179 | 0.3 | 17 | 3.2 | 206 | 0.4 |
| Peripheral oedema ICPC | 1782 | 3.2 | 143 | 27.2 | 2034 | 3.6 |
| Peripheral oedema physical examination | 56 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.4 | 58 | 0.1 |
| Auscultation heart | 363 | 0.7 | 8 | 1.5 | 381 | 0.7 |
| Abnormalities auscultation heart | 23 | 0.04 | 1 | 0.2 | 25 | 0.04 |
| Heart murmur ICPC | 363 | 0.7 | 6 | 1.1 | 372 | 0.7 |
| Additional tests | ||||||
| BNP | 6 | 0.01 | 0 | 0.0 | 16 | 0.03 |
| NT-proBNP | 1934 | 3.5 | 200 | 38.1 | 2365 | 4.2 |
ICPC=International Classification of Primary Care; BNP=brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP=N-terminal pro-BNP.
Not/seldom recorded: symptoms: orthopnoea, fatigue, signs: elevated central venous pressure, enlarged liver, ascites, widened ictus cordis, additional tests: echocardiography, electrocardiography, chest X-ray.
This group included no HF (n=55 224), HF diagnosed in 2010 or later (n=525) and HF before 2010 (n=571).
Discussion
Prevalence, age and comorbidities
This retrospective cohort study showed an overall point prevalence of HF of 1.2% in the adult population. Prevalence increased with each age category from 0.04% in patients younger than 44 years to 20.9% in patients aged 85 years or older. Comorbidities, COPD, DM, hypertension, anaemia and RFD, were significantly more common in patients with HF than in patients without HF. The symptoms and signs dyspnoea, anginal symptoms and peripheral oedema were reported most frequently in the process of diagnosing HF.
NT-proBNP
NT-proBNP was recorded in only 38.1% of HF patients, although it is recommended in the HF guidelines as a test to assist GPs to rule out HF. Especially in elderly patients with comorbidities, such as COPD, HF patients may be overdiagnosed due to overlap in symptoms and signs (Brenner et al., 2013). In these patients, NT-proBNP would be useful to prevent overdiagnosing HF.
Comparison with existing literature
The prevalence rates found in our study are not comparable to those presented in other studies, due to differences in region, population (not primary care) and definitions/methods to assess HF. Most studies estimated the prevalence of HF by conducting a population-based study in which patients underwent diagnostic work-up and sometimes an expert panel was used to make the final diagnosis. Moreover, these studies only included patients older than 45–55 years, which led to higher overall prevalence rates (Mosterd et al., 1999; Daamen et al., 2015). However, Engelfriet et al. (2012) and Van Baal et al. (2010) did conduct a comparable study to estimate the prevalence rates of HF in the Netherlands. They found comparable overall prevalence rates, but lower rates (between 11 and 16%), in patients aged 85 years or older. These differences can possibly be explained by the ageing of the population in the Netherlands. Our findings regarding the high number of comorbidities in HF patients were consistent with other studies (Van Deursen et al., 2014). Although common risk factors are likely to contribute, HF itself might cause other comorbidities, and treatment of HF may have a negative impact, for example on renal function. Consequently, HF, often complicated by comorbidities, has started to put a great burden on the GP in recent years, which can be expected to increase even more.
In our study, the selected variables to represent symptoms, signs and additional tests were barely recorded. It is plausible to assume that these variables are not recorded in the way they were extracted because GPs use free text in patients’ medical files to describe data instead of coding them. A study of Vijayakrishnan et al. (2014), performed in the USA, used data extracted from free text and showed much higher percentages for documented symptoms and signs in primary care. As mentioned before, we had no access to free text in the EHR in our database which is in accordance with the guidelines of the Dutch data protection authorities (Krabben, 2005). In addition, diagnostic tests performed in secondary care, are not included in the primary care EHR. Confirmation by echocardiography is mandatory to diagnose HF (Hoes et al., 2010; Yancy et al., 2013; Ponipowski et al., 2016). Valk et al. (2016) performed a study in which turned out that more than one-third of patients labelled with HF in primary care might not have HF. In this study, in case patients labelled with HF had not yet undergone echocardiography, their GP was recommended to refer for an echocardiography to confirm the diagnosis. This shows the importance of echocardiography in the process of diagnosing HF. Unfortunately no data of echocardiography were available in our study, because this is recorded in free text.
Strengths and limitations
Some limitations of our study should be considered. First, we made no distinction between acute and chronic HF, therefore we used the lowest cut-off point of NT-proBNP. This did not alter our findings since, according to the guidelines, the diagnosis of acute HF is primarily based on anamnesis and physical examination (Hoes et al., 2010; Yancy et al., 2013; Ponipowski et al., 2016), and we already included these in our study. Another limitation is that we might have missed recordings of diagnostic tests for HF since these tests could be performed in secondary care. It is estimated that about 50% of patients with HF are referred to a cardiologist (RIVM, 2018). Furthermore, we could not use free text to study symptoms, signs and additional clinical tests and therefore we could not study echocardiographic assessment unfortunately. Besides, recall or recording bias might have arisen in this study concerning the numbers for dyspnoea, anginal symptoms and peripheral oedema. However, this does not apply to BNP and NT-proBNP as all laboratory values that are ordered by the GP are added automatically to the EHR. Finally, our conclusions regarding the relation between HF and comorbidities are not based on specific age categories. However, when looking at HF and comorbidities within the different age categories, the majority remains statistically significant. For example, RFD shows statistical significance in every age category.
A strength of our study is that it describes routine care for HF patients in general practice, where most HF patients are diagnosed and managed. Furthermore, we used data from general practices which are affiliated with the Radboudumc and have been shown to have very accurate ways of registration (Van der Wel et al., 2008). Another strength of our study is that we believe our study population to be representative for the overall population and therefore, our study results to be generalizable to patients with and without HF in the general adult population.
Implications for practice
HF is highly associated with ageing and comorbidities, which makes the process of diagnosing HF in our ageing population more challenging. The complexity of this syndrome requires more comorbidity-specific recommendations in the existing guidelines, especially for the combination of HF and COPD or RFD. Our results show that symptoms and signs of HF were infrequently recorded and that additional tests were requested in 38% of the patients. This is partly explained by the fact that the diagnostic process may have been performed in secondary care, which was not included in our database. Also, these findings reflect a combination of the recording discipline of the GPs and the actual performance on diagnostic procedures. Despite these caveats, our study indicates that the process of diagnosing HF shows room for improvement. In particular, diagnostic use of NT-proBNP in routine primary care seems underutilized. Preliminary qualitative analysis among GPs from our research institute, suggests that (lack of) knowledge of the HF guidelines determines the (lack of) of measurement of NT-proBNP. Instruction of GPs to determine NT-proBNP in patients suspected of HF is recommended, especially in elderly patients with comorbidities.
Declaration
Funding: none. Ethical approval: this study was performed according to the code of conduct for health research, which has been approved by the data protection authorities for conformity with the applicable Dutch privacy legislation. Competing interests: the authors have declared no competing interests.
Authors’ Contribution
Design of the study; L.B., P.A., B.W.M.S., M.C.J.B. Data collection; L.B., B.W.M.S. Data entry; L..B., B.W.M.S. Data analysis; L.B., B.W.M.S., M.C.J.B. Interpretation of the data; all authors. Preparation of manuscript draft; all authors. All authors provided intellectual content and approved the final version. L.B. is the guarantor of the study.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the participating GPs and patients from the NMP.
Cite this article: Bosch L, Assmann P, de Grauw WJC, Schalk BWM, Biermans MCJ. (2019). Heart failure in primary care: prevalence related to age and comorbidity. Primary Health Care Research & Development. 20(e79): 1–8. doi: 10.1017/S1463423618000889
References
- Ambrosy AP, Fonarow GC, Butler J, Chioncel O, Greene SJ, Vaduganathan M, Nodari S, Lam CSP, Sato N, Shah AN Gheorghiade M (2014) The global health and economic burden of hospitalizations for heart failure: lessons learned from hospitalized heart failure registries. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 63, 1123–1133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bleumink GS, Knetsch AM, Sturkenboom MC, Straus SM, Hofman A, Deckers JW, Witteman JC Stricker BH (2004) Quantifying the heart failure epidemic: prevalence, incidence rate, lifetime risk and prognosis of heart failure. The Rotterdam Study. European Heart Journal 25, 1614–1619. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brenner S, Güder G, Berliner D, Deubner N, Fröhlich K, Ertl G, Jany B, Angermann CE Störk S (2013) Airway obstruction in systolic heart failure – COPD or congestion? International Journal of Cardiology 168, 1910–1916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Daamen MA, Hamers JP, Gorgels AP, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Tan FE, Van Dieijen-Visser MP Schols JM (2015) Heart failure in nursing home residents; a cross-sectional study to determine the prevalence and clinical characteristics. BMC Geriatrics 15, 167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Danielsen R, Thorgeirsson G, Einarsson H, Ólafsson O, Aspelund T, Harris TB, Launer L Gudnason V (2017) Prevalence of heart failure in the elderly and future projections: the AGES-Reykjavík study. Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal 51, 183–189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dutch College of General Practitioners (2016) Table diagnostic terms version 24 (9 December 2015). Retrieved 27 February 2016 from https://aut.nhg.org/labcodeviewer/.
- Engelfriet PM, Hoogenveen RT, Poos MJJC, Blokstra A, Van Baal PHM Verschuren WMM (2012) Hartfalen: epidemiologie, risicofactoren en toekomst [Heart failure: epidemiology, risk factors and future]. RIVM, report number 260401006 (In Dutch).
- Hobbs FD, Kenkre JE, Roalfe AK, Davis RC, Hare R Davies MK (2002) Impact of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction on quality of life: a cross-sectional study comparing common chronic cardiac and medical disorders and a representative adult population. European Heart Journal 23, 1867–1876. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hoes AW, Mosterd A Grobbee DE (1998) An epidemic of heart failure? Recent evidence from Europe. European Heart Journal 19, L2–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hoes AW, Voors AA, Rutten FH, Van Lieshout J, Janssen PGH Walma EP (2010) The Dutch college of general practitioners guideline on heart failure. Huisarts en Wetenschap 53, 368–389 (In Dutch). [Google Scholar]
- Krabben JAL (2005) Landelijke zorgregistraties [National care reports]. Retrieved 13 May 2016 from http://www.fnt.nl/media/docs/externe_publicaties/Rapport_landelijke_zorgregistratie_ 2005.pdf.
- Mant J, Doust J, Roalfe A, Barton P, Cowie MR, Glasziou P, Mant D, McManus RJ, Holder R, Deeks J, Fletcher K, Qume M, Sohanpal S, Sanders S Hobbs FD (2009) Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of diagnosis of heart failure, with modelling of implications of different diagnostic strategies in primary care. Health Technology Assessment 13, 1–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mosterd A, Hoes AW, De Bruyne MC, Deckers JW, Linker DT, Hofman A Grobbee DE (1999) Prevalence of heart failure and left ventricular dysfunction in the general population: the Rotterdam Study. European Heart Journal 20, 447–455. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- NMP (2011) Netwerk Academische Huisartsen Praktijken Nijmegen [Primary care practice based research network (PBRN)]: the Nijmegen Monitoring Project 2011. Retrieved 16 February 2016 from http://www.nmpnijmegen.nl/.
- Ponipowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, Falk V, González-Juanatey JR, Harjola VP, Jankowska EA, Jessup M, Linde C, Nihoyannopoulos P, Parissis JT, Pieske B, Riley JP, Rosano GMC, Ruilope LM, Ruschitzka F, Rutten FH Van der Meer P (2016) 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. European Heart Journal 37, 2129–2200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Remes J, Miettinen H, Reunanen A Pyörälä K (1991) Validity of clinical diagnosis of heart failure in primary health care. European Heart Journal 12, 315–321. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- RIVM (2018) Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu [National institute of public health and the environment]. Retrieved 27 September 2018 from https://www.volksgezondheidenzorg.info/onderwerp/hartfalen/preventie-zorg/zorg#bronverantwoording.
- Rutten FH, Engelfriet PM Poos MJJC (2016) Hoeveel zorg gebruiken patiënten met hartfalen en wat zijn de kosten? [How much care do patients with heart failure use and what are the costs?]. Retrieved 18 February 2016 from http://www.nationaalkompas.nl/gezondheid-en-ziekte/ziekten-en-aandoeningen/hartvaatstelsel/hartfalen/welke-zorg-gebruiken-patienten-en-kosten/.
- Valk MJ, Mosterd A, Broekhuizen BDL, Zuithoff NP, Landman MA, Hoes AW Rutten FH (2016) Overdiagnosis of heart failure in primary care: a cross-sectional study. British Journal of General Practice 66, e587–e592. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van Baal PH, Hoogenveen RT, Engelfriet PM Boshuizen HC (2010) Indirect estimation of chronic disease excess mortality. Epidemiology 21, 425–426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van der Wel M, Bakx C, De Grauw W, Van Gerwen W, Mulder J Van Weel C (2008) The influence of guideline revisions on the process and outcome of hypertension management in general practice: a descriptive study. European Journal of General Practice 14, 47–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van Deursen VM, Urso R, Laroche C, Damman K, Dahlström U, Tavazzi L, Maggioni AP Voors AA (2014) Co-morbidities in patients with heart failure: an analysis of the European Heart Failure Pilot Survey. European Journal of Heart Failure 16, 103–111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vijayakrishnan R, Steinhubl SR, Ng K, Sun J, Byrd RJ, Daar Z, Williams BA, deFilippi C, Ebadollahi S Stewart WF (2014) Prevalence of heart failure signs and symptoms in a large primary care population identified through the use of text and data mining of the electronic health record. Journal of Cardiac Failure 20, 459–464. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, Butler J, Casey DE Jr, Drazner MH, Fonarow GC, Geraci SA, Horwich T, Januzzi JL, Johnson MR, Kasper EK, Levy WC, Masoudi FA, McBride PE, McMurray JJ, Mitchell JE, Peterson PN, Riegel B, Sam F, Stevenson LW, Tang WH, Tsai EJ Wilkoff BL (2013) 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Circulation 128, e240–e327. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]