Mentz, Robert JWhellan, David JReeves, Gordon RPastva, Amy MDuncan, PamelaUpadhya, BharathiNelson, M BenjaminChen, HaiyingReed, Shelby DRosenberg, Paul BBertoni, Alain GO'Connor, Christopher MKitzman, Dalane W2024-02-022024-02-022021-102213-17792213-1787https://hdl.handle.net/10161/30118<h4>Objectives</h4>This study assessed for treatment interactions by ejection fraction (EF) subgroup (≥45% [heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF); vs <45% [heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)]).<h4>Background</h4>The REHAB-HF trial showed that an early multidomain rehabilitation intervention improved physical function, frailty, quality-of-life, and depression in older patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).<h4>Methods</h4>Three-month outcomes were: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), 6-min walk distance (6MWD), and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Six-month end points included all-cause rehospitalization and death and a global rank of death, all-cause rehospitalization, and SPPB. Prespecified significance level for interaction was P ≤ 0.1.<h4>Results</h4>Among 349 total participants, 185 (53%) had HFpEF and 164 (47%) had HFrEF. Compared with HFrEF, HFpEF participants were more often women (61% vs 43%) and had significantly worse baseline physical function, frailty, quality of life, and depression. Although interaction P values for 3-month outcomes were not significant, effect sizes were larger for HFpEF vs HFrEF: SPPB +1.9 (95% CI: 1.1-2.6) vs +1.1 (95% CI: 0.3-1.9); 6MWD +40 meters (95% CI: 9 meters-72 meters) vs +27 (95% CI: -6 meters to 59 meters); KCCQ +9 (2-16) vs +6 (-2 to 14). All-cause rehospitalization rate was nominally lower with intervention in HFpEF but not HFrEF [effect size 0.83 (95% CI: 0.64-1.09) vs 0.99 (95% CI: 0.74-1.33); interaction P = 0.40]. There were significantly greater treatment benefits in HFpEF vs HFrEF for all-cause death [interaction P = 0.08; intervention rate ratio 0.63 (95% CI: 0.25-1.61) vs 2.21 (95% CI: 0.78-6.25)], and the global rank end point (interaction P = 0.098) with benefit seen in HFpEF [probability index 0.59 (95% CI: 0.50-0.68)] but not HFrEF.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Among older patients hospitalized with ADHF, compared with HFrEF those with HFpEF had significantly worse impairments at baseline and may derive greater benefit from the intervention. (A Trial of Rehabilitation Therapy in Older Acute Heart Failure Patients [REHAB-HF]; NCT02196038).HumansVentricular Dysfunction, LeftStroke VolumePrognosisQuality of LifeAgedFemaleHeart FailureJournal article