Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Without knowing the exact CHF prevalence, chronic heart failure (CHF) occurs frequently in elderly people both inside and outside nursing homes. For a diagnosis we have to rely on physical examination and additional tests. We therefore run the risk of missing CHF diagnoses or of diagnosing CHF when we should not. Natriuretic peptide assays have emerged as a diagnostic test but their use in nursing home residents is limited. We examined the number of misdiagnoses, the CHF prevalence and the role of natriuretic peptide. METHOD: Residents in one centre without aphasia, cognitive impairments or metastatic cancer were screened for CHF; the natriuretic peptide levels were measured separately. RESULTS: Of the 150 residents, 103 (64%) were included (79+/-11 years). The diagnosis of CHF was established in 24 of these 103 residents with NTproBNP 1871 (IQR 539 to 4262) and BNP 194 (IQR 92 to 460) pg/ml. A striking result was that of the 24 residents found to have CHF after the screening, 15 (66%) had previously been undetected: NT-proBNP 1146 (interquartile range (IQR) 228 to 3341) and BNP 200 (IQR 107 to 433) pg/ml. Moreover, in 13 out of 22 residents (62%) who had previously been thought to have CHF, the diagnosis was rejected: NT-proBNP 388 (IQR 174 to 719) and BPN 90 (IQR 35 to 128) pg/ml). Regarding the diagnostic accuracy of NT-proBNP and BNP, the optimal cut-off level of NT-proBNP was 450 pg/ml with a sensitivity of 0.71 and specificity of 0.67, and for BNP it was 100 pg/ml with a sensitivity of 0.71 and specificity of 0.70. CONCLUSION: Both undetected and incorrect diagnoses of CHF were common. NT-proBNP and BNP were moderately accurate at diagnosing CHF. CHF prevalence was 23%. (Neth Heart J 2008;16:123-8.).