ArticleESC heart failure2026
Attitudes towards using single-pill combination (polypill) therapy in heart failure: patients' and physicians' perspectives.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Landmark clinical trials shaping contemporary guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSingle-pill combinations (SPC, polypills) have proven effective in cardiovascular areas, yet no such therapy exists for patients with heart failure (HF) despite substantial polypharmacy and pill burden in this population. Simplifying treatment through an HF-specific SPC containing key guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) components could improve adherence and outcomes.
methodsTwo prospective, electronic surveys were conducted between June and October 2025 to assess real-world attitudes towards a polypill in HF with ejection fraction ≤50%. The physician-oriented survey (22 questions) was distributed internationally and explored GDMT practices, perceived needs, barriers, and potential preferred composition of an HF dedicated SPC. The patient-oriented survey (11 questions) explored medication burden, adherence, and perceptions of a potential polypill use.
resultsA total of 250 physicians and 126 patients participated. Among physicians, 77% reported a clear need for strategies to simplify GDMT optimisation in HFrEF, with cost (66%) and polypharmacy (54%) being selected as the most frequent barriers. Nearly all physicians (95%) recognized a real clinical need for an HF-specific SPC, and most perceived it as clinically useful (88%), logistically feasible (76%), and acceptable to patients (94%). Approximately 48% of physicians declared that they would use it regularly, and another 49% would use it in selected patients. The preferred composition of HF-specific SPC included a beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), and SGLT2 inhibitor (61.2%).Among patients, polypharmacy was common (70% taking ≥6 drugs daily), and 75% admitted to occasional non-adherence. Most responders (82%) would support a solution that reduces the pill burden, and 83% would take an HF-specific SCP if offered, particularly if there is no extra cost.
conclusionBoth physicians and patients showed strong openness and willingness towards an HF-specific SPC, supporting further development and evaluation of HF-specific polypill strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.