{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04551661356395084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.032771961766044605, 'mean_word_length': 4.467661691542289, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Abstract P164: Urban-rural Disparities Amongst Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction


 Intro:
 Differences in health care delivery between urban and rural populations have been described, but the extent to which this impacts treatment and outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) within a large, rural HF referral network has not been evaluated to date.
 
 
 Objective:
 To describe differences in guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) usage and cardiovascular (CV) mortality in urban vs rural dwelling individuals with HFrEF in Vermont.
 
 
 Methods:
 A retrospective analysis was performed on adult HFrEF patients residing in Vermont referred to University of Vermont Medical Center between January 1, 2015-2017. The study included all patients with a documented EF
 <
 35% on echo. Demographics, risk factors, use of GDMT, and all-cause CV mortality were obtained. Urban and rural designations were based on the ZIP code version of the Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) classification system. Poisson regression analysis was used to compare the relative risk for mortality and use of GDMT by rurality.
 
 
 Results:
 838 patients were identified (mean age 71.4
 +
 12.9 years old; 66.5% male) and divided into 3 RUCA groups (urban, rural, isolated). Adjusting for age, sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation and smoking status, no difference was seen in GDMT (table 1) between urban and rural patients (relative risk [RR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.64-1.67). Urban patients were less likely than isolated patients to use GDT (RR, 0.75; 95% CI 0.52-1.08). There was a CV mortality benefit for those in rural (RR, 0.50; 95% CI 0.34-0.73) or isolated areas (RR, 0.74; 95% CI 0.62-0.89) compared to those in urban areas.
 
 
 Conclusion:
 While GDMT reduces morbidity and mortality in HFrEF patients, it was underutilized throughout Vermont. Findings from this state-wide cohort of decreased CV mortality in rural and isolated areas are contrary to prior studies. This finding highlights the unique socioeconomic environment of Northern New England and has important implications for CHF management and resource allocation.
 
 
 
