There is evidence of sex-difference in the prevalence of heart failure (HF) but little is known about the treatment and care difference between women and men.

To compare, between men and women, the type and aetiology of HF, the treatment and diet prescribed and the enrolment in disease management program.

Patients hospitalized for HF at least one time for the last five years regardless of the NYHA level or LVEF were included. Both patients and physicians answered a questionnaire from where data were retrieved.

Among the 2788 HF patients included, 832 (30%) were women and 1956 (70%) were men. HF-Women were older than HF-Men (71[60; 81] vs. 67[58; 76]), more likely to have non-ischemic and valvular heart disease than coronary artery disease and less likely to have cardiovascular risk factor. HF-Women were more symptomatic than men (9.9% of NYHA 4 vs. 6.1%) and their quality of life measured by the Minnesota quality of life questionnaire was worse than men: 50 [32; 66] vs. 47 [31;61]. LVEF and NTpro-BNP were slightly higher in HF-Women than to HF-Men (Table 1). HF-Women received less frequently effective medical treatment, less device therapies, less education program enrolment, less prescription of diet, and in contrast were similarly treated with symptomatic treatment (loop diuretics, fluid restriction) (Table 1). Therefore, when women participated in a patient education program, their compliance was equal or higher than HF-Men. HF-Women diet burden measured by the Burden In Restricted Diets score (BIRD) was more important than HF-Men(BIRD=16 [12; 24] in women, 15 [12; 21] in men).

French HF-Women have a higher HF-burden than men therefore they receive less effective medical and devices treatment and education program than HF-Men. Reasons for these gender specific differences might be explained by HF type or LVEF class but also questioned about potential disparitiesin care management between both sex.