Dataset Information

End-of-Life Discussions in Patients With Heart Failure.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Although guidelines call on clinicians to conduct regular conversations about advance care planning and end-of-life (EOL) preferences with patients with heart failure (HF), research suggests that physicians often avoid these discussions. METHODS AND RESULTS:From January 20, 2014, to January 18, 2016, Southeastern Minnesota residents hospitalized with acute decompensated HF (ADHF) at Mayo Clinic hospitals were enrolled into an observational cohort study that included the administration of face-to-face questionnaires. Risk of death (prognosis) was estimated using the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure score. Among 400 patients (mean age 77.7 years, 46% female, 48% preserved ejection fraction), only 69 (17%) reported previously discussing EOL wishes with their physician. Patients reporting EOL discussions more often had an advance directive (81% vs 66%; P?=?.009), recognized the term "hospice" (96% vs 87%; P?=?.027), and had more favorable attitudes of dying and hospice (P?=?.030). Resuscitation preferences and rates of completion of advance directives varied with prognosis, although patient-clinician EOL discussions did not. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of patients hospitalized with ADHF did not recall discussing their preferences for EOL care with their physician. This represents an important modifiable gap in the optimal longitudinal care of HF patients.

SUBMITTER: Young KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5671349 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

End-of-Life Discussions in Patients With Heart Failure.

Young Kathleen A KA Redfield Margaret M MM Strand Jacob J JJ Dunlay Shannon M SM

Journal of cardiac failure 20170831 11

<h4>Background</h4>Although guidelines call on clinicians to conduct regular conversations about advance care planning and end-of-life (EOL) preferences with patients with heart failure (HF), research suggests that physicians often avoid these discussions.<h4>Methods and results</h4>From January 20, 2014, to January 18, 2016, Southeastern Minnesota residents hospitalized with acute decompensated HF (ADHF) at Mayo Clinic hospitals were enrolled into an observational cohort study that included the ...[more]

PMID: 28842378

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEnd-of-life discussions (EOLds) occur infrequently until cancer patients become terminally ill.MethodsTo identify factors associated with the timing of EOLds, we conducted a nationwide survey of 864 medical oncologists. We surveyed the timing of EOLds held with advanced cancer patients regarding prognosis, hospice, site of death, and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status; and we surveyed physicians' experience of EOLds, perceptions of a good death, and beliefs regarding these issues. Multivariate analyses identified determinants of early discussions.ResultsAmong 490 physicians (response rate: 57%), 165 (34%), 65 (14%), 47 (9.8%), and 20 (4.2%) would discuss prognosis, hospice, site of death, and DNR status, respectively, "now" (i.e., at diagnosis) with a hypothetical patient with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer. In multivariate analyses, determinants of discussing prognosis "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of autonomy in experiencing a good death (odds ratio [OR]: 1.34; p = .014), less perceived difficulty estimating the prognosis (OR: 0.77; p = .012), and being a hematologist (OR: 1.68; p = .016). Determinants of discussing hospice "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.58; p = .018), less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.67; p = .002), and no responsibility as treating physician at end of life (OR: 1.94; p = .031). Determinants of discussing site of death "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of life completion in experiencing a good death (OR: 1.83; p = .008) and less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.74; p = .034). The determinant of discussing DNR status "now" was less discomfort talking about death (OR: 0.49; p = .003).ConclusionReflection by oncologists on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death is helpful for oncologists to perform appropriate EOLds.Implications for practiceOncologists' own perceptions about what is important for a "good death," perceived difficulty in estimating the prognosis, and discomfort in talking about death influence their attitudes toward end-of-life discussions. Reflection on their own values regarding a good death, knowledge about validated prognostic measures, and learning skills to manage discomfort talking about death are important for improving oncologists' skills in facilitating end-of-life discussions.

Project description:AimsEarly engagement in advance care planning (ACP) is recommended in heart failure (HF) management. We investigated the preferences of patients with HF regarding ACP and end-of-life (EOL) care, including their desired timing of ACP initiation.Methods and resultsData were collected using a 92-item questionnaire survey, which was directly distributed to hospitalized patients by dedicated physicians and nurses in a university hospital setting. One-hundred eighty-seven patients agreed to participate (response rate: 92.6%), and 171 completed the survey [valid response rate: 84.7%; men: 67.3%; median age: 73.0 (63.0-81.0) years]. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify the predictors of positive attitudes towards ACP. Most recognized ACP as important for their care (n = 127, 74.3%), 48.1% stated that ACP should be initiated after repeated HF hospitalizations in the past year, and 29.0% preferred ACP to begin during the first or second HF hospitalization. Only 21.7% of patients had previously engaged in ACP conversations during HF management. Positive attitudes towards ACP were associated with lower depressive symptoms [two-item Patient Health Questionnaire; odds ratio (OR): 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.92, P-value: 0.006], marriage (OR: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.25-5.12, P-value: 0.010), and a high educational level (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.28-5.56, P-value: 0.009), but not with severity of HF (represented by Seattle Heart Failure Model risk score). Regarding EOL care, while 'Saying what one wants to tell loved ones' (83.4%), 'Dying a natural death' (81.8%), and 'Being able to stay at one's favorite place' (75.6%) were the three most important factors for patients, preferences for 'Receiving sufficient treatment' (56.5%) and 'Knowing what to expect about future condition' (50.3%) were divergent.ConclusionsDespite patients' preferences for ACP conversations, there was a discrepancy between preference and engagement in ACP among patients hospitalized for HF. Patients' preferences regarding EOL care may differ; physicians need to consider the appropriate ACP approach to align with patients' care goals.

Dataset Information

End-of-Life Discussions in Patients With Heart Failure.

Publications

End-of-Life Discussions in Patients With Heart Failure.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets