Dataset Information

Which patients with heart failure should receive specialist palliative care?

ABSTRACT:

Aims

We investigated which patients with heart failure (HF) should receive specialist palliative care (SPC) by first creating a definition of need for SPC in patients hospitalised with HF using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and then testing this definition using the outcome of days alive and out of hospital (DAOH). We also evaluated which baseline variables predicted need for SPC and whether those with this need received SPC.

Methods and results

PROMs assessing quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and mood were administered at baseline and every 4?months. SPC need was defined as persistently severe impairment of any PROM without improvement (or severe impairment immediately preceding death). We then tested whether need for SPC, so defined, was reflected in DAOH, a measure which combines length of stay, days of hospital re-admission, and days lost due to death. Of 272 patients recruited, 74 (27%) met the definition of SPC needs. These patients lived one third fewer DAOH than those without SPC need (and less than a quarter of QoL-adjusted DAOH). A Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) summary score of <29 identified patients who subsequently had SPC needs (area under receiver operating characteristic curve 0.78). Twenty-four per cent of patients with SPC needs actually received SPC (n?=?18).

Conclusions

A quarter of patients hospitalised with HF had a need for SPC and were identified by a low KCCQ score on admission. Those with SPC need spent many fewer DAOH and their DAOH were of significantly worse quality. Very few patients with SPC needs accessed SPC services.

SUBMITTER: Campbell RT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6607479 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Which patients with heart failure should receive specialist palliative care?

Campbell Ross T RT Petrie Mark C MC Jackson Colette E CE Jhund Pardeep S PS Wright Ann A Gardner Roy S RS Sonecki Piotr P Pozzi Andrea A McSkimming Paula P McConnachie Alex A Finlay Fiona F Davidson Patricia P Denvir Martin A MA Johnson Miriam J MJ Hogg Karen J KJ McMurray John J V JJV

European journal of heart failure 20180628 9

<h4>Aims</h4>We investigated which patients with heart failure (HF) should receive specialist palliative care (SPC) by first creating a definition of need for SPC in patients hospitalised with HF using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and then testing this definition using the outcome of days alive and out of hospital (DAOH). We also evaluated which baseline variables predicted need for SPC and whether those with this need received SPC.<h4>Methods and results</h4>PROMs assessing quality ...[more]

PMID: 29952090

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFew hospitals and heart failure (HF) clinics offer concurrent palliative care (PC) together with life-prolonging therapies. To know the prevalence of patients in HF clinics needing PC and useful tools to recognize them are the first steps to extending PC in those settings. However, it is still unknown whether tools commonly used to identify patients with HF needing PC can correctly distinguish them. Two systematic reviews found that the NECesidades PALiativas (NECPAL) tool was one of the two most commonly used tools to asses PC needs in HF patients. Therefore, we assessed 1) the prevalence of PC needs in HF clinics according to the NECPAL tool, and 2) the characteristics of the patients identified as having PC; mainly, their quality of life (QoL), symptom burden, and psychosocial problems.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at two HF clinics in Colombia. We assessed the prevalence of PC in the overall sample and in subgroups according to clinical and demographic variables. We assessed QoL, symptom burden, and psychosocial problems using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). We compared the results of these tools between patients identified as having PC needs (+NECPAL) and patients identified as not having PC needs (-NECPAL).ResultsAmong the 178 patients, 78 (44%) had PC needs. The prevalence of PC needs was twice as nigh in patients NYHA III/IV as in patients NYHA I/II and almost twice as high in patients older than 70 years as in patients younger than 70 years. Compared to -NECPAL patients, +NECPAL patients had worse QoL, more severe shortness of breath, tiredness, drowsiness, and pain, and more psychosocial problems.ConclusionThe prevalence of PC needs in outpatient HF clinics is high and is even higher in older patients and in patients at more advanced NYHA stages. Compared to patients identified as not having PC needs, patients identified as having PC needs have worse QoL, more severe symptoms, and greater psychosocial problems. Including a PC provider in the multidisciplinary team of HF clinics may help to assess and cover these needs.

Project description:Background Palliative care supports quality of life, symptom control, and goal setting in heart failure (HF) patients. Unlike hospice, palliative care does not restrict life-prolonging therapy. This study examined the association between palliative care during hospitalization for HF on the subsequent transitions and procedures. Methods and Results Veterans admitted to hospitals with HF from 2010 to 2015 were randomly selected for the Veterans Administration External Peer Review Program. Variables pertaining to demographic, clinical, laboratory, and usage were captured from Veterans Administration electronic records. Patients receiving hospice services before admission were excluded. Patients who received palliative care were propensity matched to those who did not. The primary outcomes were whether the patient experienced transitions or procedures in the 6 months after admission. Transitions included multiple readmissions (≥2) or intensive care admissions and procedures included mechanical ventilation, pacemaker implantation, or defibrillator implantation. Among 57 182 hospitalized HF patients, 1431 received palliative care, and were well matched to 1431 without (standardized mean differences ≤ ±0.05 on all matched variables). Palliative care was associated with significantly fewer multiple rehospitalizations (30.9% versus 40.3%, P<0.001), mechanical ventilation (2.8% versus 5.4%, P=0.004), and defibrillator implantation (2.1% versus 3.6%, P=0.01). After adjustment for facility fixed effects, palliative care consultation was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of multiple readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio=0.73, 95% CI, 0.64-0.84) and mechanical ventilation (adjusted hazard ratio=0.76, 95% CI, 0.67-0.87). Conclusions Palliative care during HF admissions was associated with fewer readmissions and less mechanical ventilation. When available, engagement of HF patients and caregivers in palliative care for symptom control, quality of life, and goals of care discussions may be associated with reduced rehospitalizations and mechanical ventilation.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Advanced heart failure (HF) is characterized by high morbidity and mortality. Conventional therapy may not sufficiently reduce patient suffering and maximize quality of life. OBJECTIVES:The authors investigated whether an interdisciplinary palliative care intervention in addition to evidence-based HF care improves certain outcomes. METHODS:The authors randomized 150 patients with advanced HF between August 15, 2012, and June 25, 2015, to usual care (UC) (n = 75) or UC plus a palliative care intervention (UC + PAL) (n = 75) at a single center. Primary endpoints were 2 quality-of-life measurements, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall summary and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (FACIT-Pal), assessed at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included assessments of depression and anxiety (measured via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), spiritual well-being (measured via the FACIT-Spiritual Well-Being scale [FACIT-Sp]), hospitalizations, and mortality. RESULTS:Patients randomized to UC + PAL versus UC alone had clinically significant incremental improvement in KCCQ and FACIT-Pal scores from randomization to 6 months (KCCQ difference = 9.49 points, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94 to 18.05, p = 0.030; FACIT-Pal difference = 11.77 points, 95% CI: 0.84 to 22.71, p = 0.035). Depression improved in UC + PAL patients (HADS-depression difference = -1.94 points; p = 0.020) versus UC-alone patients, with similar findings for anxiety (HADS-anxiety difference = -1.83 points; p = 0.048). Spiritual well-being was improved in UC + PAL versus UC-alone patients (FACIT-Sp difference = 3.98 points; p = 0.027). Randomization to UC + PAL did not affect rehospitalization or mortality. CONCLUSIONS:An interdisciplinary palliative care intervention in advanced HF patients showed consistently greater benefits in quality of life, anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being compared with UC alone. (Palliative Care in Heart Failure [PAL-HF]; NCT01589601).

Dataset Information

Which patients with heart failure should receive specialist palliative care?

Aims

Methods and results

Conclusions

Publications

Which patients with heart failure should receive specialist palliative care?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets