Primary Results of the Patient-Centered Disease Management (PCDM) for Heart Failure Study: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Clinical outcomes of digital sensor alerting systems in remote monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Advances in digital technologies have allowed remote monitoring and digital alerting systems to gain popularity. Despite this, limited evidence exists to substantiate claims that digital alerting can improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to appraise the evidence on the clinical outcomes of digital alerting systems in remote monitoring through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search, with no language restrictions, was performed to identify studies evaluating healthcare outcomes of digital sensor alerting systems used in remote monitoring across all (medical and surgical) cohorts. The primary outcome was hospitalisation; secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality, emergency department and outpatient visits. Standard, pooled hazard ratio and proportion of means meta-analyses were performed. A total of 33 studies met the eligibility criteria; of which, 23 allowed for a meta-analysis. A 9.6% mean decrease in hospitalisation favouring digital alerting systems from a pooled random effects analysis was noted. However, pooled weighted mean differences and hazard ratios did not reproduce this finding. Digital alerting reduced hospital LOS by a mean difference of 1.043 days. A 3% mean decrease in all-cause mortality from digital alerting systems was noted. There was no benefit of digital alerting with respect to emergency department or outpatient visits. Digital alerts can considerably reduce hospitalisation and length of stay for certain cohorts in remote monitoring. Further research is required to confirm these findings and trial different alerting protocols to understand optimal alerting to guide future widespread implementation.

Evaluation of a Transitional Care Program After Hospitalization for Heart Failure in an Integrated Health Care System

IMPORTANCE

Prompted by null findings from several care transition trials and practice changes for heart failure in recent years, leaders from a large integrated health care system aimed to reassess the outcomes of its 10-year multicomponent transitional care program for heart failure (HF-TCP).

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of the individual HF-TCP components and their bundle with the primary outcome of all-cause 30-day inpatient or observation stay readmissions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study included patients enrolled in the HF-TCP during an inpatient encounter for heart failure at 13 Kaiser Permanente Southern California hospitals from January 1, 2013, to October 31, 2018, who were followed up from discharge until 30 days, readmission, or death. Data were analyzed from May 7, 2019, to May 1, 2020, with additional review from September 2 to October 1, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Patients received 1 home health visit or telecare (telephone) visit from a registered nurse within 2 days of hospital discharge, a heart failure care manager call within 7 days, and a clinic visit with a physician or a nurse practitioner within 7 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multivariable proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the probability of 30-day readmission for those who received the individual or bundled HF-TCP components compared with those who did not.

RESULTS

A total of 26 128 patients were included; 57.0% were male, and the mean (SD) age was 73 (13) years. The 30-day readmission rate was 18.1%. Both exposure to a home health visit within 2 days of discharge (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.10) and a 7-day heart failure case manager call (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.99-1.18) compared with no visit or call were not associated with a lower rate of readmission. Completion of a 7-day clinic visit was associated with a lower readmission rate (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.94) compared with no clinic visit. There were no synergistic effects of all 3 components compared with clinic visit alone (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.28).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that HF-TCP as a whole was not associated with a reduction in 30-day readmission rates, although a follow-up clinic visit within 7 days of discharge may be helpful. These findings highlight the importance of continuous quality improvement and refinement of existing clinical programs.

Quality versus risk of bias assessment of palliative care trials: comparison of two tools

BACKGROUND

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of palliative care interventions are challenging to conduct and evaluate. Tools used to judge the quality of RCTs do not account for the complexities of conducting research in seriously ill populations and may artificially downgrade confidence in palliative care research.

OBJECTIVE

To compare assessments from the Palliative Care Trial Assessment Tool (PCTAT) and Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool.

DESIGN

Reviewers assessed 43 RCTs using PCTAT and RoB. We compared assessments of each trial, assessed overall agreement (weighted kappa (Kw)) and examined (dis)agreement for comparable items. We assessed quality of life at 1-3 months among trials grouped according to RoB or PCTAT score (using meta-analysis) and whether RoB or quality improved over time (Cochran-Armitage trend test).

RESULTS

Of 43 trials, those rated low RoB had a mean PCTAT score of 73 (SD 10); those rated high RoB had a mean PCTAT score of 56 (SD 14). Overall Kw was 0.33 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.42). Total agreement between comparable items was observed for 56% of trials (24/43) and total disagreement for 21% (8/43). The standardised mean difference in quality of life was statistically significant among RCTs with low RoB and high PCTAT, but not for those with medium/low PCTAT or high/unclear RoB. Quality of reporting improved over time, whereas RoB did not.

CONCLUSION

Although there was fair agreement between tools, areas of disagreement/non-comparability suggest the tools capture different aspects of bias/quality. A specific tool to evaluate quality of palliative care trials may be warranted.

An Electronically Delivered Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The EPIC-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

Major gaps exist in the routine initiation and dose up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Without novel approaches to improve prescribing, the cumulative benefits of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treatment will be largely unrealized. Direct-to-consumer marketing and shared decision making reflect a culture where patients are increasingly involved in treatment choices, creating opportunities for prescribing interventions that engage patients.

METHODS

The EPIC-HF (Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial randomized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction from a diverse health system to usual care versus patient activation tools-a 3-minute video and 1-page checklist-delivered electronically 1 week before, 3 days before, and 24 hours before a cardiology clinic visit. The tools encouraged patients to work collaboratively with their clinicians to "make one positive change" in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prescribing. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with GDMT medication initiations and dose intensifications from immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, compared with usual care during the same period.

RESULTS

EPIC-HF enrolled 306 patients, 290 of whom attended a clinic visit during the study period: 145 were sent the patient activation tools and 145 were controls. The median age of patients was 65 years; 29% were female, 11% were Black, 7% were Hispanic, and the median ejection fraction was 32%. Preclinic data revealed significant GDMT opportunities, with no patients on target doses of β-blocker, sacubitril/valsartan, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. From immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, 49.0% in the intervention and 29.7% in the control experienced an initiation or intensification of their GDMT (P=0.001). The majority of these changes were made at the clinician encounter itself and involved dose uptitrations. There were no deaths and no significant differences in hospitalization or emergency department visits at 30 days between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient activation tool delivered electronically before a cardiology clinic visit improved clinician intensification of GDMT. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03334188.

Effects of Different Telemonitoring Strategies on Chronic Heart Failure Care: Systematic Review and Subgroup Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Telemonitoring studies in chronic heart failure are characterized by mixed mortality and hospitalization outcomes, which have deterred the uptake of telemonitoring in clinical practice. These mixed outcomes may reflect the diverse range of patient management strategies incorporated in telemonitoring. To address this, we compared the effects of different telemonitoring strategies on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and subgroup meta-analysis was to identify noninvasive telemonitoring strategies attributing to improvements in all-cause mortality or hospitalization outcomes for patients with chronic heart failure.

METHODS

We reviewed and analyzed telemonitoring strategies from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing telemonitoring intervention with usual care. For each strategy, we examined whether RCTs that applied the strategy in the telemonitoring intervention (subgroup 1) resulted in a significantly lower risk ratio (RR) of all-cause mortality or incidence rate ratio (IRR) of all-cause hospitalization compared with RCTs that did not apply this strategy (subgroup 2).

RESULTS

We included 26 RCTs (N=11,450) incorporating 18 different telemonitoring strategies. RCTs that provided medication support were found to be associated with a significantly lower IRR value than RCTs that did not provide this type of support (P=.01; subgroup 1 IRR=0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95 vs subgroup 2 IRR=1.02, 95% CI 0.93-1.12). RCTs that applied mobile health were associated with a significantly lower IRR (P=.03; IRR=0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.96 vs IRR=1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.06) and RR (P=.01; RR=0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.85 vs RR=0.95, 95% CI 0.84-1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Telemonitoring strategies involving medication support and mobile health were associated with improvements in all-cause mortality or hospitalization outcomes. These strategies should be prioritized in telemonitoring interventions for the management of patients with chronic heart failure.

An Electronically delivered, Patient-activation tool for Intensification of medications for Chronic Heart Failure with reduced ejection fraction: Rationale and design of the EPIC-HF trial

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) benefits from initiation and intensification of multiple pharmacotherapies. Unfortunately, there are major gaps in the routine use of these drugs. Without novel approaches to improve prescribing, the cumulative benefits of HFrEF treatment will be largely unrealized. Direct-to-consumer marketing and shared decision making reflect a culture where patients are increasingly involved in treatment choices, creating opportunities for prescribing interventions that engage patients.

HYPOTHESIS

Encouraging patients to engage providers in HFrEF prescribing decisions will improve the use of guideline-directed medical therapies.

DESIGN

The Electronically delivered, Patient-activation tool for Intensification of Chronic medications for Heart Failure with reduced ejection fraction (EPIC-HF) trial randomizes patients with HFrEF to usual care versus patient-activation tools-a 3-minute video and 1-page checklist-delivered prior to cardiology clinic visits that encourage patients to work collaboratively with their clinicians to intensify HFrEF prescribing. The study assesses the effectiveness of the EPIC-HF intervention to improve guideline-directed medical therapy in the month after its delivery while using an implementation design to also understand the reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of this approach within the context of real-world care delivery. Study enrollment was completed in January 2020, with a total 305 patients. Baseline data revealed significant opportunities, with <1% of patients on optimal HFrEF medical therapy.

SUMMARY

The EPIC-HF trial assesses the implementation, effectiveness, and safety of patient engagement in HFrEF prescribing decisions. If successful, the tool can be easily disseminated and may inform similar interventions for other chronic conditions.

Association of Receipt of Palliative Care Interventions With Health Care Use, Quality of Life, and Symptom Burden Among Adults With Chronic Noncancer Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The evidence for palliative care exists predominantly for patients with cancer. The effect of palliative care on important end-of-life outcomes in patients with noncancer illness is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To measure the association between palliative care and acute health care use, quality of life (QOL), and symptom burden in adults with chronic noncancer illnesses.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed from inception to April 18, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with chronic noncancer illness. Studies involving at least 50% of patients with cancer were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data from studies. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. All outcomes were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Acute health care use (hospitalizations and emergency department use), disease-generic and disease-specific quality of life (QOL), and symptoms, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (range, 0 [worst] to 184 [best]; minimal clinically important difference, 9 points) and symptoms translated to units of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale global distress score (range, 0 [best] to 90 [worst]; minimal clinically important difference, 5.7 points).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials provided data on 13 664 patients (mean age, 74 years; 46% were women). Ten trials were of heart failure (n = 4068 patients), 11 of mixed disease (n = 8119), 4 of dementia (n = 1036), and 3 of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 441). Palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less emergency department use (9 trials [n = 2712]; 20% vs 24%; odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-1.00]; I2 = 3%), less hospitalization (14 trials [n = 3706]; 38% vs 42%; odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.99]; I2 = 41%), and modestly lower symptom burden (11 trials [n = 2598]; pooled standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.12; [95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03]; I2 = 0%; Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale score mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.6 to -0.4]). Palliative care was not significantly associated with disease-generic QOL (6 trials [n = 1334]; SMD, 0.18 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.61]; I2 = 87%; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care score mean difference, 4.7 [95% CI, -6.3 to 15.9]) or disease-specific measures of QOL (11 trials [n = 2204]; SMD, 0.07 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.23]; I2 = 68%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of patients with primarily noncancer illness, palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less acute health care use and modestly lower symptom burden, but there was no significant difference in quality of life. Analyses for some outcomes were based predominantly on studies of patients with heart failure, which may limit generalizability to other chronic illnesses.

mHealth education interventions in heart failure

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic disease with significant impact on quality of life and presents many challenges to those diagnosed with the condition, due to a seemingly complex daily regimen of self-care which includes medications, monitoring of weight and symptoms, identification of signs of deterioration and follow-up and interaction with multiple healthcare services. Education is vital for understanding the importance of this regimen, and adhering to it. Traditionally, education has been provided to people with heart failure in a face-to-face manner, either in a community or a hospital setting, using paper-based materials or video/DVD presentations. In an age of rapidly-evolving technology and uptake of smartphones and tablet devices, mHealth-based technology (defined by the World Health Organization as mobile and wireless technologies to achieve health objectives) is an innovative way to provide health education which has the benefit of being able to reach people who are unable or unwilling to access traditional heart failure education programmes and services.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review and quantify the potential benefits and harms of mHealth-delivered education for people with heart failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an extensive search of bibliographic databases and registries (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, IEEE Xplore, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal), using terms to identify HF, education and mHealth. We searched all databases from their inception to October 2019 and imposed no restriction on language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies if they were conducted as a randomised controlled trial (RCT), involving adults (≥ 18 years) with a diagnosis of HF. We included trials comparing mHealth-delivered education such as internet and web-based education programmes for use on smartphones and tablets (including apps) and other mobile devices, SMS messages and social media-delivered education programmes, versus usual HF care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous data with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We include five RCTs (971 participants) of mHealth-delivered education interventions for people with HF in this review. The number of trial participants ranged from 28 to 512 participants. Mean age of participants ranged from 60 years to 75 years, and 63% of participants across the studies were men. Studies originated from Australia, China, Iran, Sweden, and The Netherlands. Most studies included participants with symptomatic HF, NYHA Class II - III. Three studies addressed HF knowledge, revealing that the use of mHealth-delivered education programmes showed no evidence of a difference in HF knowledge compared to usual care (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.40, P = 0.51, I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 411 participants; low-quality evidence). One study assessing self-efficacy reported that both study groups had high levels of self-efficacy at baseline and uncertainty in the evidence for the intervention (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.57 to 1.77; P = 0.31; 1 study, 29 participants; very low-quality evidence).Three studies evaluated HF self-care using different scales. We did not pool the studies due to the heterogenous nature of the outcome measures, and the evidence is uncertain. None of the studies reported adverse events. Four studies examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There was uncertainty in the evidence for the use of mHealth-delivered education on HRQoL (MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.35 to 2.15; P = 0.93, I2 = 61%; 4 studies, 942 participants; very low-quality evidence). Three studies reported on HF-related hospitalisation. The use of mHealth-delivered education may result in little to no difference in HF-related hospitalisation (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.06; P = 0.10, I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 894 participants; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the studies due to limitations in study design and execution, heterogeneity, wide confidence intervals and fewer than 500 participants in the analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that the use of mHealth-delivered educational interventions for people with HF shows no evidence of a difference in HF knowledge; uncertainty in the evidence for self-efficacy, self-care and health-related quality of life; and may result in little to no difference in HF-related hospitalisations. The identification of studies currently underway and those awaiting classification indicate that this is an area of research from which further evidence will emerge in the short and longer term.

Goal-Striving Stress and Incident Cardiovascular Disease in Blacks: The Jackson Heart Study

Background Goal-striving stress (GSS), the stress from striving for goals, is associated with poor health. Less is known about its association with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods and Results We used data from the JHS (Jackson Heart Study), a study of CVD among blacks (21-95 years old) from 2000 to 2015. Participants free of CVD at baseline (2000-2004) were included in this analysis (n=4648). GSS was examined in categories (low, moderate, high) and in SD units. Incident CVD was defined as fatal or nonfatal stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), and/or heart failure. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of incident CVD by levels of GSS, adjusting for demographics, socioeconomic status, health behaviors, risk factors, and perceived stress. The distribution of GSS categories was as follows: 40.77% low, 33.97% moderate, and 25.26% high. Over an average of 12 years, there were 140 incident stroke events, 164 CHD events, and 194 heart failure events. After full adjustment, high (versus low) GSS was associated with a lower risk of stroke (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17-0.83) and a higher risk of CHD (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.10-3.33) among women. A 1-standard deviation unit increase in GSS was associated with a 31% increased risk of CHD (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.10-1.56) among women. Conclusions Higher GSS may be a risk factor for developing CHD among women; however, it appears to be protective of stroke among women. These analyses should be replicated in other samples of black individuals.

Impact of Healthcare Delivery System Type on Clinical, Utilization, and Cost Outcomes of Patient-Centered Medical Homes: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As healthcare reimbursement shifts from being volume to value-focused, new delivery models aim to coordinate care and improve quality. The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model is one such model that aims to deliver coordinated, accessible healthcare to improve outcomes and decrease costs. It is unclear how the types of delivery systems in which PCMHs operate differentially impact outcomes. We aim to describe economic, utilization, quality, clinical, and patient satisfaction outcomes resulting from PCMH interventions operating within integrated delivery and finance systems (IDFS), government systems including Veterans Administration, and non-integrated delivery systems.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase from 2004 to 2017. Observational studies and clinical trials occurring within the USA that met PCMH criteria (as defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), addressed ambulatory adults, and reported utilization, economic, clinical, processes and quality of care, or patient satisfaction outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies were included. Twenty-four percent were within IDFS, 29% were within government systems, and 47% were within non-IDFS. IDFS studies reported decreased emergency department use, primary care use, and cost relative to other systems after PCMH implementation. Government systems reported increased primary care use relative to other systems after PCMH implementation. Clinical outcomes, processes and quality of care, and patient satisfaction were assessed heterogeneously or infrequently.

DISCUSSION

Published articles assessing PCMH interventions generally report improved outcomes related to utilization and cost. IDFS and government systems exhibit different outcomes relative to non-integrated systems, demonstrating that different health systems and populations may be particularly sensitive to PCMH interventions. Both the definition of PCMH interventions and outcomes measured are heterogeneous, limiting the ability to perform direct comparisons or meta-analysis.

Palliative cardiovascular care: The right patient at the right time

In the increasingly complex world of modern medicine, relationship-centered, team-based care is important in geriatric cardiology. Palliative cardiovascular care plays a central role in defining the scope and timing of medical therapies and in coordinating symptom-targeted care in line with patient wishes, values, and preferences. Palliative care addresses advance care planning, symptom relief and caregiver/family support and seeks to ameliorate all forms of suffering, including physical, psychological, and spiritual. Although palliative care grew out of the hospice movement and has traditionally been associated with care at the end of life, the current model acknowledges that palliative care can be delivered concurrent with invasive, life-prolonging interventions. As the population ages, patients with serious cardiovascular disease increasingly suffer from noncardiac, multimorbid conditions and become eligible for interventions that palliate symptoms but also prolong life. Management of implanted cardiac support devices at the end of life, whether rhythm management devices or mechanical circulatory support devices, can involve a host of complexities in decisions to deactivate, timing of deactivation and even the mechanics of deactivation. Studies on palliative care interventions have demonstrated clear improvements in quality of life and are more mixed on life prolongation and cost savings. There is and will remain a dearth of clinicians with specialist palliative care training. Therefore, cardiovascular clinicians have a role to play in provision of practical, "primary" palliative care.

Heart failure disease management: a systematic review of effectiveness in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) poses a substantial challenge for clinicians, but there is little guidance for effective management. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if there was evidence that disease management programmes (DMPs) improved outcomes for patients with HFpEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic review of controlled studies in English or Greek of DMPs including patients with HFpEF from 2008 to 2018 was conducted using CINAHL, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase. Interventions were assessed using a DMP taxonomy and scored for complexity and intensity. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Initial and updated searches found 6089 titles once duplicates were removed. The final analysis included 18 studies with 5435 HF patients: 1866 patients (34%, study ranges 18-100%) had potential HFpEF (limited by variable definitions). Significant heterogeneity in terms of the population, intervention, comparisons, and outcomes prohibited meta-analysis. Statistically significant or positive trends were found in mortality, hospitalization rates, self-care ability, quality of life, anxiety, depression, and sleep, but findings were not robust or consistent. Four studies reported results separately for study-defined HFpEF, with two finding less positive effect on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Varying definitions of HFpEF used in studies are a substantial limitation in interpretation of findings. The reduced efficacy noted in contemporary HF DMP studies may not only be due to improvements in usual care but may also reflect inclusion of heterogeneous patients with HFpEF or HF with mid-range EF who may not respond in the same way as HFrEF to individual components. Given that patients with HFpEF are older and multi-morbid, DMPs targeting HFpEF should not rely on a single-disease focus but provide care that addresses predisposing and presentation phenotypes and draws on the principles of comprehensive geriatric assessment. Other components could also be more targeted to HFpEF such as modification of lifestyle factors for which there is emerging evidence, rather than simply continuing the model of care used in HFrEF. Based on current evidence, HF DMPs may improve mortality, hospitalization rates, self-care, and quality of life in patients with HFpEF; however, further research specifically tailored to appropriately defined HFpEF is required.

Non-invasive home telemonitoring system for heart failure patients: A randomized clinical trial

Introduction

The low quality of life in heart failure patients is related to low self-care and treatment adherence. Consequently, innovative strategies are needed to improve them. The objective of this work is to determine the effectiveness of the use of a home telemonitoring system to improve the self-care and treatment adherence of heart failure patients.

Methods

A randomized clinical trial that compares the efficacy of a home telemonitoring system –intervention group versus usual care control group – among heart failure outpatients over a 90-day monitoring period was carried out. The home telemonitoring system consists of an application that collects measurements of different parameters on a daily basis and provides health education to patients. The home telemonitoring system processes data gathered and generates an alert if a risky situation arises. The outcomes observed were significant changes in patients’ self-care (European Heart Failure Self-care Behaviour Scale), treatment adherence (Morisky Modified Scale) and re-hospitalizations over the follow-up period.

Results

104 heart failure patients were screened; 40 met the inclusion criteria; only 30 completed the study. After the follow-up, intragroup analysis of the control group indicated a decrease in treatment adherence ( p = 0.02). The mean European Heart Failure Self-care Behaviour Scale overall score indicated an improved self-care in the intervention group patients ( p = 0.03) and a worsened self-care in the control group ( p = 0.04) with a p value of 0.004 in the intergroup analysis. Thanks to the home telemonitoring system alerts, two re-hospitalizations were avoided.

Discussion

This study demonstrated that the proposed home telemonitoring system improves patient self-care when compared to usual care and has the potential to avoid re-hospitalizations, even considering patients with low literacy levels. Trial Registration: Home Telemonitoring System for Patients with Heart Failure. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04071093

Implementation of interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions for cardiovascular or respiratory conditions: an evidence map and realist synthesis

Background

In 2012, a series of systematic reviews summarised the evidence regarding interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions. Although intervention effects were dependent on context, the reviews revealed a consistent picture of reduction across different interventions targeting cardiovascular and respiratory conditions. The research reported here sought to provide an in-depth understanding of how interventions that have been shown to reduce admissions for these conditions may work, with a view to supporting their effective implementation in practice.

Objectives

To map the available evidence on interventions used in the UK NHS to reduce preventable admissions for cardiovascular and respiratory conditions and to conduct a realist synthesis of implementation evidence related to these interventions.

Methods

For the mapping review, six databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and October 2017. Studies were included if they were conducted in the UK, the USA, Canada, Australia or New Zealand; recruited adults with a cardiovascular or respiratory condition; and evaluated or described an intervention that could reduce preventable admissions or re-admissions. A descriptive summary of key characteristics of the included studies was produced. The studies included in the mapping review helped to inform the sampling frame for the subsequent realist synthesis. The wider evidence base was also engaged through supplementary searching. Data extraction forms were developed using appropriate frameworks (an implementation framework, an intervention template and a realist logic template). Following identification of initial programme theories (from the theoretical literature, empirical studies and insights from the patient and public involvement group), the review team extracted data into evidence tables. Programme theories were examined against the individual intervention types and collectively as a set. The resultant hypotheses functioned as synthesised statements around which an explanatory narrative referenced to the underpinning evidence base was developed. Additional searches for mid-range and overarching theories were carried out using Google Scholar (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA).

Results

A total of 569 publications were included in the mapping review. The largest group originated from the USA. The included studies from the UK showed a similar distribution to that of the map as a whole, but there was evidence of some country-specific features, such as the prominence of studies of telehealth. In the realist synthesis, it was found that interventions with strong evidence of effectiveness overall had not necessarily demonstrated effectiveness in UK settings. This could be a barrier to using these interventions in the NHS. Facilitation of the implementation of interventions was often not reported or inadequately reported. Many of the interventions were diverse in the ways in which they were delivered. There was also considerable overlap in the content of interventions. The role of specialist nurses was highlighted in several studies. The five programme theories identified were supported to varying degrees by empirical literature, but all provided valuable insights.

Limitations

The research was conducted by a small team; time and resources limited the team’s ability to consult with a full range of stakeholders.

Conclusions

Overall, implementation appears to be favoured by support for self-management by patients and their families/carers, support for services that signpost patients to consider alternatives to seeing their general practitioner when appropriate, recognition of possible reasons why patients seek admission, support for health-care professionals to diagnose and refer patients appropriately and support for workforce roles that promote continuity of care and co-ordination between services.

Future work

Research should focus on understanding discrepancies between national and international evidence and the transferability of findings between different contexts; the design and evaluation of implementation strategies informed by theories about how the intervention being implemented might work; and qualitative research on decision-making around hospital referrals and admissions.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Effect of involving certified healthcare assistants in primary care in Germany: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Growing prevalence of chronic diseases and limited resources are the key challenges for future healthcare. As a promising approach to maintain high-quality primary care, non-physician healthcare professionals have been trained to broaden qualifications and responsibilities. This study aimed to assess the influence of involving certified healthcare assistants (HCAs, German: Versorgungsassistent/in in der Hausarztpraxis) on quality and efficacy of primary care in Germany.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients insured by the Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse (AOK) statutory health insurer (AOK, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany).

INTERVENTIONS

Since 2008 practice assistants in Germany can enhance their professional education to become certified HCAs.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Claims data related to patients treated in practices employing at least one HCA were compared with data from practices not employing HCAs to determine frequency of consultations, hospital admissions and readmissions. Economic analysis comprised hospitalisation costs, prescriptions of follow-on drugs and outpatient medication costs.

RESULTS

A total of 397 493 patients were treated in HCA practices, 463 730 patients attended to non-HCA practices. Patients in HCA practices had an 8.2% lower rate of specialist consultations (p<0.0001), a 4.0% lower rate of hospitalisations (p<0.0001), a 3.5% lower rate of readmissions (p=0.0463), a 14.2% lower rate of follow-on drug prescriptions (p<0.0001) and 4.7% lower costs of total medication (p<0.0001). No difference was found regarding the consultation rate of general practitioners and hospital costs.

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time, this high-volume claims data analysis showed that involving HCAs in primary care in Germany is associated with a reduction in hospital admissions, specialist consultations and medication costs. Consequently, broadening qualifications may be a successful strategy not only to share physicians' work load but to improve quality and efficacy in primary care to meet future challenges. Future studies may explore specific tasks to be shared with non-physician workforces and standardisation of the professional role.

Comparing Specialty and Primary Palliative Care Interventions: Analysis of a Systematic Review

Background: Investigators have tested interventions delivered by specialty palliative care (SPC) clinicians, or by clinicians without palliative care specialization (primary palliative care, PPC). Objective: To compare the characteristics and outcomes of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of SPC and PPC interventions. Design: Systematic review secondary analysis. Setting/Subjects: RCTs of palliative care interventions. Measurements: Interventions were classified SPC if delivered by palliative care board-certified or subspecialty trained clinicians, or those with extensive clinical experience; all others were PPC. We abstracted data for each intervention: delivery setting, delivery clinicians, outcomes measured, trial results, and Cochrane's Risk of Bias. We conducted narrative synthesis for quality of life, symptom burden, and survival. Results: Of 43 RCTs, 27 tested SPC and 16 tested PPC interventions. SPC interventions were more comprehensive (4.2 elements of palliative care vs. 3.1 in PPC, p = 0.02). SPC interventions were delivered in inpatient (44%) or outpatient settings (52%) by specialty physicians (44%) and nurses (44%); PPC interventions were delivered in inpatient (38%) and home settings (38%) by nurses (75%). PPC trials were more often of high risk of bias than SPC trials. Improvements were demonstrated on quality of life by SPC and PPC trials and on physical symptoms by SPC trials. Conclusions: Compared to PPC, SPC interventions were more comprehensive, were more often delivered in clinical settings, and demonstrated stronger evidence for improving physical symptoms. In the face of SPC workforce limitations, PPC interventions should be tested in more trials with low risk of bias, and may effectively meet some palliative care needs.

Impact of multi-disciplinary treatment strategy on systolic heart failure outcome

BACKGROUND

Patients with reduced ejection fraction have high rates of mortality and readmission after hospitalization for heart failure. In Taiwan, heart failure disease management programs (HFDMPs) have proven effective for reducing readmissions for decompensated heart failure or other cardiovascular causes by up to 30%. However, the benefits of HFDMP in different populations of heart failure patients is unknown.

METHOD

This observational cohort study compared mortality and readmission in heart failure patients who participated in an HFDMP (HFDMP group) and heart failure patients who received standard care (non-HFDMP group) over a 1-year follow-up period after discharge (December 2014 retrospectively registered). The components of the intervention program included a patient education program delivered by the lead nurse of the HFDMP; a cardiac rehabilitation program provided by a physical therapist; consultation with a dietician, and consultation and assessment by a psychologist. The patients were followed up for at least 1 year after discharge or until death. Patient characteristics and clinical demographic data were compared between the two groups. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for death or recurrent events of hospitalization in the HFDMP group in comparison with the non-HFDMP group while controlling for covariates.

RESULTS

The two groups did not significantly differ in demographic characteristics. The risk of readmission was lower in the HFDMP group, but the difference was not statistically significant (HR = 0.36, p = 0.09). In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, the risk of readmission was significantly lower in the HFDMP group compared to the non-HFDMP group (HR = 0.13, p = 0.026). The total mortality rate did not have significant difference between this two groups.

CONCLUSION

The HFDMP may be beneficial for reducing recurrent events of heart failure hospitalization, especially in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Longitudinal case-control study ISRCTN98483065 , 24/09/2019, retrospectively registered.

The right time for palliative care in heart failure: a review of critical moments for palliative care intervention

Heart failure (HF) is a progressive condition with high mortality and heavy symptom burden. Despite guideline recommendations, cardiologists refer to palliative care at rates much lower than other specialties and very late in the course of the disease, often in the final 3 days of life. One reason for delayed referral is that prognostication is challenging in patients with HF, making it unclear when and how the limited resources of specialist palliative care will be most beneficial. It might be more prudent to consider palliative care referrals at critical moments in the trajectory of patients with HF. These include: a) the development of poor prognostic signs in the outpatient setting; b) hospitalization or intensive care unit admission, and c) at the time of evaluation for certain procedures, such as left ventricular assist device placement and ablation for refractory ventricular arrhythmias, among others. In this review, we also summarize the results of clinical trials evaluating palliative interventions in these settings.

COMPASS: A Pilot Trial of an Early Palliative Care Intervention for Patients With End-Stage Liver Disease

CONTEXT

Palliative care interventions have shown promise in improving quality of life and reducing health-care utilization among patients with chronic organ failure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of a palliative care intervention for adults with end-stage liver disease.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial of patients with end-stage liver disease admitted to the hepatology service at a tertiary referral center whose attending hepatologist indicated they would not be surprised if the patient died in the following year on a standardized questionnaire was performed. Control group patients received usual care. Intervention group patients received inpatient specialist palliative care consultations and outpatient phone follow-up by a palliative care nurse. The primary outcome was time until first readmission. Secondary outcomes included days alive outside the hospital, referral to hospice care, death, readmissions, patient quality of life, depression, anxiety, and quality of end-of-life care over 6 months.

RESULTS

The trial stopped early because of difficulties in accruing patients. Of 293 eligible patients, only 63 patients were enrolled, 31 in the intervention group and 32 in the control group. This pace of enrollment was only 25% of what the study had planned, and so it was deemed infeasible to complete. Despite stopping early, intervention group patients had a lower hazard of readmission (hazard ratio: 0.36, 95% confidence interval: 0.16-0.83, P = 0.017) and greater odds of having more days alive outside the hospital than control group patients (odds ratio: 3.97, 95% confidence interval: 1.14-13.84, P = 0.030). No other statistically significant differences were observed.

CONCLUSION

Logistical obstacles hindered completion of the trial as originally designed. Nevertheless, a preemptive palliative care intervention resulted in increased time to first readmission and more days alive outside the hospital in the first six months after study entry.

Multi-disciplinary palliative care is effective in people with symptomatic heart failure: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Despite recommendations, people with heart failure have poor access to palliative care.

AIM

To identify the evidence in relation to palliative care for people with symptomatic heart failure.

DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis. (PROSPERO CRD42016029911).

DATA SOURCES

Databases (Medline, Cochrane database, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, CareSearch Grey Literature), reference lists and citations were searched and experts contacted. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and retrieved papers against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included papers and studies were critically assessed using a risk of bias tool according to design.

RESULTS

Thirteen interventional and 10 observational studies were included. Studies were heterogeneous in terms of population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and design rendering combination inappropriate. The evaluation phase studies, with lower risk of bias, using a multi-disciplinary specialist palliative care intervention showed statistically significant benefit for patient-reported outcomes (symptom burden, depression, functional status, quality of life), resource use and costs of care. Benefit was not seen in studies with a single component/discipline intervention or with higher risk of bias. Possible contamination in some studies may have caused under-estimation of effect and missing data may have introduced bias. There was no apparent effect on survival.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the results support the use of multi-disciplinary palliative care in people with advanced heart failure but trials do not identify who would benefit most from specialist palliative referral. There are no sufficiently robust multi-centre evaluation phase trials to provide generalisable findings. Use of common population, intervention and outcomes in future research would allow meta-analysis.

Setting Up a Heart Failure Program in 2018: Moving Towards New Paradigm(s)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure (HF) is the first cause of hospitalization in the elderly in Western countries, generating tremendous healthcare costs. Despite the spread of multidisciplinary post-discharge programs, readmission rates have remained unchanged over time. We review the recent developments in this setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent data plead for global reorganization of HF care, specifically targeting patients at high risk for further readmission, as well as a stronger involvement of primary care providers (PCP) in patients' care plan. Besides, tools, devices, and new interdisciplinary expertise have emerged to support and be integrated into those programs; they have been greeted with great enthusiasm, but their routine applicability remains to be determined. HF programs in 2018 should focus on pragmatic assessments of patients that will benefit the most from the multidisciplinary care; delegating the management of low-risk patients to trained PCP and empowering the patient himself, using the newly available tools as needed.

Depression and Anxiety in Heart Failure: A Review

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Identify the relationships between depression, anxiety, and heart failure (HF).• Assess methods for accurately diagnosing depression and anxiety disorders in patients with HF.• Evaluate current evidence for treatment of anxiety and depression in patients with HF.

BACKGROUND

In patients with heart failure (HF), depression and anxiety disorders are common and associated with adverse outcomes such as reduced adherence to treatment, poor function, increased hospitalizations, and elevated mortality. Despite the adverse impact of these disorders, anxiety and depression remain underdiagnosed and undertreated in HF patients.

METHODS

We performed a targeted literature review to (1) identify associations between depression, anxiety, and HF, (2) examine mechanisms mediating relationships between these conditions and medical outcomes, (3) identify methods for accurately diagnosing depression and anxiety disorders in HF, and (4) review current evidence for treatments of these conditions in this population.

RESULTS

Both depression and anxiety disorders are associated with the development and progression of HF, including increased rates of mortality, likely mediated through both physiologic and behavioral mechanisms. Given the overlap between cardiac and psychiatric symptoms, accurately diagnosing depression or anxiety disorders in HF patients can be challenging. Adherence to formal diagnostic criteria and utilization of a clinical interview are the best courses of action in the evaluation process. There is limited evidence for the efficacy of pharmacologic and psychotherapy in patients with HF. However, cognitive-behavioral therapy has been shown to improve mental health outcomes in patients with HF, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors appear safe in this cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Depression and anxiety disorders in HF patients are common, underrecognized, and linked to adverse outcomes. Further research to improve detection and develop effective treatments for these disorders in HF patients is badly needed.

Screening and Management of Depression in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Depression is a common problem in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and is associated with increased mortality, excess disability, greater health care expenditures, and reduced quality of life. Depression is present in 1 of 5 patients with coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, and heart failure. Depression complicates the optimal management of CVD by worsening cardiovascular risk factors and decreasing adherence to healthy lifestyles and evidence-based medical therapies. As such, standardized screening pathways for depression in patients with CVD offer the potential for early identification and optimal management of depression to improve health outcomes. Unfortunately, the burden of depression in patients with CVD is under-recognized; as a result, screening and management strategies targeting depression have been poorly implemented in patients with CVD. In this review, the authors discuss a practical approach for the screening and management of depression in patients with CVD.

Management of comorbid mental and somatic disorders in stepped care approaches in primary care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Stepped care models comprise a graded treatment intensity and a systematic monitoring. For an effective implementation, stepped care models have to account for the high rates of mental and somatic comorbidity in primary care.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the systematic review was to take stock of whether present stepped care models take comorbidities into consideration. A further aim was to give an overview on treatment components and involved health care professionals.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Selection criteria were a randomized controlled trial of a primary-care-based stepped care intervention, adult samples, publication between 2000 and 2017 and English or German language.

RESULTS

Of 1009 search results, 39 studies were eligible. One-third of the trials were conceived for depressive disorders only, one-third for depression and further somatic and/or mental comorbidity and one-third for conditions other than depression. In 39% of the studies comorbidities were explicitly integrated in treatment, mainly via transdiagnostic self-management support, interprofessional collaboration and digital approaches for treatment, monitoring and communication. Most care teams were composed of a primary care physician, a care manager and a psychiatrist and/or psychologist. Due to the heterogeneity of the addressed disorders, no meta-analysis was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Several stepped care models in primary care already account for comorbidities, with depression being the predominant target disorder. To determine their efficacy, the identified strategies to account for comorbidities should be investigated within stepped care models for a broader range of disorders.

Disease management interventions for heart failure

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatment, the increasing and ageing population makes heart failure an important cause of morbidity and death worldwide. It is associated with high healthcare costs, partly driven by frequent hospital readmissions. Disease management interventions may help to manage people with heart failure in a more proactive, preventative way than drug therapy alone. This is the second update of a review published in 2005 and updated in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different disease management interventions for heart failure (which are not purely educational in focus), with usual care, in terms of death, hospital readmissions, quality of life and cost-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL for this review update on 9 January 2018 and two clinical trials registries on 4 July 2018. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least six months' follow-up, comparing disease management interventions to usual care for adults who had been admitted to hospital at least once with a diagnosis of heart failure. There were three main types of intervention: case management; clinic-based interventions; multidisciplinary interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Outcomes of interest were mortality due to heart failure, mortality due to any cause, hospital readmission for heart failure, hospital readmission for any cause, adverse effects, quality of life, costs and cost-effectiveness.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 22 new RCTs, so now include 47 RCTs (10,869 participants). Twenty-eight were case management interventions, seven were clinic-based models, nine were multidisciplinary interventions, and three could not be categorised as any of these. The included studies were predominantly in an older population, with most studies reporting a mean age of between 67 and 80 years. Seven RCTs were in upper-middle-income countries, the rest were in high-income countries.Only two multidisciplinary-intervention RCTs reported mortality due to heart failure. Pooled analysis gave a risk ratio (RR) of 0.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 0.95), but the very low-quality evidence means we are uncertain of the effect on mortality due to heart failure. Based on this limited evidence, the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) is 12 (95% CI 9 to 126).Twenty-six case management RCTs reported all-cause mortality, with low-quality evidence indicating that these may reduce all-cause mortality (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.90; NNTB 25, 95% CI 17 to 54). We pooled all seven clinic-based studies, with low-quality evidence suggesting they may make little to no difference to all-cause mortality. Pooled analysis of eight multidisciplinary studies gave moderate-quality evidence that these probably reduce all-cause mortality (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; NNTB 17, 95% CI 12 to 32).We pooled data on heart failure readmissions from 12 case management studies. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that they probably reduce heart failure readmissions (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.78; NNTB 8, 95% CI 6 to 13). We were able to pool only two clinic-based studies, and the moderate-quality evidence suggested that there is probably little or no difference in heart failure readmissions between clinic-based interventions and usual care (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.18). Pooled analysis of five multidisciplinary interventions gave low-quality evidence that these may reduce the risk of heart failure readmissions (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.92; NNTB 11, 95% CI 7 to 44).Meta-analysis of 14 RCTs gave moderate-quality evidence that case management probably slightly reduces all-cause readmissions (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.01); a decrease from 491 to 451 in 1000 people (95% CI 407 to 495). Pooling four clinic-based RCTs gave low-quality and somewhat heterogeneous evidence that these may result in little or no difference in all-cause readmissions (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.12). Low-quality evidence from five RCTs indicated that multidisciplinary interventions may slightly reduce all-cause readmissions (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01); a decrease from 450 to 383 in 1000 people (95% CI 320 to 455).Neither case management nor clinic-based intervention RCTs reported adverse effects. Two multidisciplinary interventions reported that no adverse events occurred. GRADE assessment of moderate quality suggested that there may be little or no difference in adverse effects between multidisciplinary interventions and usual care.Quality of life was generally poorly reported, with high attrition. Low-quality evidence means we are uncertain about the effect of case management and multidisciplinary interventions on quality of life. Four clinic-based studies reported quality of life but we could not pool them due to differences in reporting. Low-quality evidence indicates that clinic-based interventions may result in little or no difference in quality of life.Four case management programmes had cost-effectiveness analyses, and seven reported cost data. Low-quality evidence indicates that these may reduce costs and may be cost-effective. Two clinic-based studies reported cost savings. Low-quality evidence indicates that clinic-based interventions may reduce costs slightly. Low-quality data from one multidisciplinary intervention suggested this may be cost-effective from a societal perspective but less so from a health-services perspective.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found limited evidence for the effect of disease management programmes on mortality due to heart failure, with few studies reporting this outcome. Case management may reduce all-cause mortality, and multidisciplinary interventions probably also reduce all-cause mortality, but clinic-based interventions had little or no effect on all-cause mortality. Readmissions due to heart failure or any cause were probably reduced by case-management interventions. Clinic-based interventions probably make little or no difference to heart failure readmissions and may result in little or no difference in readmissions for any cause. Multidisciplinary interventions may reduce the risk of readmission for heart failure or for any cause. There was a lack of evidence for adverse effects, and conclusions on quality of life remain uncertain due to poor-quality data. Variations in study location and time of occurrence hamper attempts to review costs and cost-effectiveness.The potential to improve quality of life is an important consideration but remains poorly reported. Improved reporting in future trials would strengthen the evidence for this patient-relevant outcome.

HerzMobil, an Integrated and Collaborative Telemonitoring-Based Disease Management Program for Patients With Heart Failure: A Feasibility Study Paving the Way to Routine Care

Background

Heart failure is a major health problem associated with frequent hospital admissions. HerzMobil Tirol is a multidisciplinary postdischarge disease management program for heart failure patients to improve quality of life, prevent readmission, and reduce mortality and health care costs. It uses a telemonitoring system that is incorporated into a network of specialized heart failure nurses, physicians, and hospitals. Patients are equipped with a mobile phone, a weighing scale, and a blood pressure and heart rate monitor for daily acquisition and transmission of data on blood pressure, heart rate, weight, well-being, and drug intake. These data are transmitted daily and regularly reviewed by the network team. In addition, patients are scheduled for 3 visits with the network physician and 2 visits with the heart failure nurse within 3 months after hospitalization for acute heart failure.

Objective

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of HerzMobil Tirol by analyzing changes in health status as well as patients’ self-care behavior and satisfaction and to derive recommendations for implementing a telemonitoring-based interdisciplinary disease management program for heart failure in everyday clinical practice.

Methods

In this prospective, pilot, single-arm study including 35 elderly patients, the feasibility of HerzMobil Tirol was assessed by analyzing changes in health status (via Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, KCCQ), patients’ self-care behavior (via European Heart Failure Self-Care Behavior Scale, revised into a 9-item scale, EHFScB-9), and user satisfaction (via Delone and McLean System Success Model).

Results

A total of 43 patients joined the HerzMobil Tirol program, and of these, 35 patients completed it. The mean age of participants was 67 years (range: 43-86 years). Health status (KCCQ, range: 0-100) improved from 46.2 to 69.8 after 3 months. Self-care behavior (EHFScB-9, possible range: 9-22) after 3 months was 13.2. Patient satisfaction in all dimensions was 86% or higher. Lessons learned for the rollout of HerzMobil Tirol comprise a definite time schedule for interventions, solid network structures with clear process definition, a network coordinator, and specially trained heart failure nurses.

Conclusions

On the basis of the positive evaluation results, HerzMobil Tirol has been officially introduced in the province of Tyrol in July 2017. It is, therefore, the first regular financed telehealth care program in Austria.

Palliative Care in Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review illustrates the dynamic role of palliative care in heart failure management and encapsulates the commonly utilized pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapeutic strategies for symptom palliation in heart failure. In addition, we provide our experience regarding patient care issues common to the domain of heart failure and palliative medicine which are commonly encountered by heart failure teams.

RECENT FINDINGS

Addition of palliative care to conventional heart failure management plan results in improvement in quality of life, anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being among patients. Palliative care should not be confused with hospice care. Palliative care teams should be involved early in the care of heart failure patients with the aims of improving symptom palliation, discussing goals of care and improving quality of life without compromising utilization of evidence-based heart failure therapies. A consensus on the appropriate timing of involvement and evidence for many symptom palliation therapies is still emerging.

Effect of a Collaborative Care Intervention vs Usual Care on Health Status of Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: The CASA Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Many patients with chronic heart failure experience reduced health status despite receiving conventional therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a symptom and psychosocial collaborative care intervention improves heart failure-specific health status, depression, and symptom burden in patients with heart failure.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A single-blind, 2-arm, multisite randomized clinical trial was conducted at Veterans Affairs, academic, and safety-net health systems in Colorado among outpatients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced health status recruited between August 2012 and April 2015. Data from all participants were included regardless of level of participation, using an intent-to-treat approach.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive the Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness (CASA) intervention or usual care. The CASA intervention included collaborative symptom care provided by a nurse and psychosocial care provided by a social worker, both of whom worked with the patients' primary care clinicians and were supervised by a study primary care clinician, cardiologist, and palliative care physician.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was patient-reported heart failure-specific health status, measured by difference in change scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (range, 0-100) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included depression (measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), anxiety (measured by the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire), overall symptom distress (measured by the General Symptom Distress Scale), specific symptoms (pain, fatigue, and shortness of breath), number of hospitalizations, and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 314 patients randomized (157 to intervention arm and 157 to control arm), there were 67 women and 247 men, mean (SD) age was 65.5 (11.4) years, and 178 (56.7%) had reduced ejection fraction. At 6 months, the mean Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score improved 5.5 points in the intervention arm and 2.9 points in the control arm (difference, 2.6; 95% CI, -1.3 to 6.6; P = .19). Among secondary outcomes, depressive symptoms and fatigue improved at 6 months with CASA (effect size of -0.29 [95% CI, -0.53 to -0.04] for depressive symptoms and -0.30 [95% CI, -0.55 to -0.06] for fatigue; P = .02 for both). There were no significant changes in overall symptom distress, pain, shortness of breath, or number of hospitalizations. Mortality at 12 months was similar in both arms (10 patients died receiving CASA, and 13 patients died receiving usual care; P = .52).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This multisite randomized clinical trial of the CASA intervention did not demonstrate improved heart failure-specific health status. Secondary outcomes of depression and fatigue, both difficult symptoms to treat in heart failure, improved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01739686.

Symptom burden in heart failure: assessment, impact on outcomes, and management

Evidence-based management has improved long-term survival in patients with heart failure (HF). However, an unintended consequence of increased longevity is that patients with HF are exposed to a greater symptom burden over time. In addition to classic symptoms such as dyspnea and edema, patients with HF frequently suffer additional symptoms such as pain, depression, gastrointestinal distress, and fatigue. In addition to obvious effects on quality of life, untreated symptoms increase clinical events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and long-term mortality in a dose-dependent fashion. Symptom management in patients with HF consists of two key components: comprehensive symptom assessment and sufficient knowledge of available approaches to alleviate the symptoms. Successful treatment addresses not just the physical but also the emotional, social, and spiritual aspects of suffering. Despite a lack of formal experience during cardiovascular training, symptom management in HF can be learned and implemented effectively by cardiology providers. Co-management with palliative medicine specialists can add significant value across the spectrum and throughout the course of HF.

Multicomponent Palliative Care Interventions in Advanced Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Many patients live with serious chronic or terminal illnesses. Multicomponent palliative care interventions have been increasingly utilized in patient care; however, it is unclear what is being implemented and who is delivering these interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) describe the delivery of multicomponent palliative care interventions, (2) characterize the disciplines delivering care, (3) identify the components being implemented, and (4) analyze whether the number of disciplines or components being implemented are associated with positive outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language articles analyzing multicomponent palliative care interventions.

OUTCOMES MEASURED

Delivery of palliative interventions by discipline, components of palliative care implemented, and number of positive outcomes (eg, pain, quality of life).

RESULTS

Our search strategy yielded 71 articles, which detailed 64 unique multicomponent palliative care interventions. Nurses (n = 64, 88%) were most often involved in delivering care, followed by physicians (n = 43, 67%), social workers (n = 33, 52%), and chaplains (n = 19, 30%). The most common palliative care components patients received were symptom management (n = 56, 88%), psychological support/counseling (n = 52, 81%), and disease education (n = 48, 75%). Statistical analysis did not uncover an association between number of disciplines or components and positive outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

While there has been growth in multicomponent palliative care interventions over the past 3 decades, important aspects require additional study such as better inclusion of key groups (eg, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, end-stage renal disease, minorities, older adults); incorporating core components of palliative care (eg, interdisciplinary team, integrating caregivers, providing spiritual support); and developing ways to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions that can be readily replicated and disseminated.

Examining the nature of interprofessional practice: An initial framework validation and creation of the InterProfessional Activity Classification Tool (InterPACT)

The practice of, and research on interprofessional working in healthcare, commonly referred to as teamwork, has been growing rapidly. This has attracted international policy support flowing from the growing belief that patient safety and quality of care can only be achieved through the collective effort of the multiple professionals caring for a given patient. Despite the increasing policy support, the evidence for effectiveness lags behind: while there are supporting analytic epidemiological studies, few reliable intervention studies have been published and so we have yet to confirm a causal link. We argue that this lag in evidence development may be because interprofessional terms (e.g. teamwork, collaboration) remain conceptually unclear, with no common terminology or definitions, making it difficult to distinguish interventions from each other. In this paper, we examine published studies from the last decade in order to elicit current usage of terms related to interprofessional working; and, in so doing, undertake an initial empirical validation of an existing conceptual framework by mapping its four categories (teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking) against the descriptions of interprofessional interventions in the included studies. We searched Medline and Embase for papers describing interprofessional interventions using a standard approach. We independently screened papers and classified these under set categories following a thematic approach. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Twenty papers met our inclusion criteria. Identified interprofessional work interventions fall into a range, from looser to tighter links between members. Definitions are inconsistently and inadequately applied. We found the framework to be a helpful and practical tool for classifying such interventions more consistently. Our analysis enabled us to scrutinise the original dimensions of the framework, confirm their usefulness and consistency, and reveal new sub-categories. We propose a slightly revised typology and a classification tool (InterPACT) for future validation, with four mutually exclusive categories: teamwork, collaboration, coordination and networking. Consistent use, further examination and refinement of the new typology and tool may lead to greater clarity in definition and design of interventions. This should support the development of a reliable and coherent evidence base on interventions to promote interprofessional working in health and social care.

General practitioners' awareness of depressive symptomatology is not associated with quality of life in heart failure patients - cross-sectional results of the observational RECODE-HF Study

BACKGROUND

Depression is a common comorbidity in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) and linked to a wider range of symptoms which, in turn, are linked to a decreased health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Treatment of depression might improve HRQOL but detecting depression is difficult due to the symptom overlap between HF and depression. Therefore, clinical guidelines recommend to routinely screen for depression in HF patients. No studies have so far investigated the treatment after getting aware of a depressive symptomatology and its correlation with HRQOL in primary care HF patients. Therefore, we examined the factors linked to depression treatment and those linked to HRQOL in HF patients. We hypothesized that GPs' awareness of depressive symptomatology was associated with depression treatment and HRQOL in HF patients.

METHODS

For this observational study, HF patients were recruited in primary care practices and filled out a questionnaire including PHQ-9 and HADS. A total of 574 patients screened positive for depressive symptomatology. Their GPs were interviewed by phone regarding the patients' comorbidities and potential depression treatment. Descriptive and regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

GPs reported various types of depression treatments (including dialogue/counselling by the GP him/herself in 31.8% of the patients). The reported rates differed considerably between GP-reported initiated treatment and patient-reported utilised treatment regarding psychotherapy (16.4% vs. 9.5%) and pharmacotherapy (61.2% vs. 30.3%). The GPs' awareness of depressive symptomatology was significantly associated with the likelihood of receiving pharmacotherapy (OR 2.8; p < 0.001) but not psychotherapy. The patient's HRQOL was not significantly associated with the GPs' awareness of depression.

CONCLUSION

GPs should be aware of the gap between GP-initiated and patient-utilised depression treatments in patients with chronic HF, which might lead to an undersupply of depression treatment. It remains to be investigated why GPs' awareness of depressive symptomatology is not linked to patients' HRQOL. We hypothesize that GPs are aware of cases with reduced HRQOL (which improves under depression treatment) and unaware of cases whose depression do not significantly impair HRQOL, resulting in comparable levels of HRQOL in both groups. This hypothesis needs to be further investigated.

Perspectives from the Kidney Health Initiative on Advancing Technologies to Facilitate Remote Monitoring of Patient Self-Care in RRT

Telehealth and remote monitoring of a patient's health status has become more commonplace in the last decade and has been applied to conditions such as heart failure, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Conversely, uptake of these technologies to help engender and support home RRTs has lagged. Although studies have looked at the role of telehealth in RRT, they are small and single-centered, and both outcome and cost-effectiveness data are needed to inform future decision making. Furthermore, alignment of payer and government (federal and state) regulations with telehealth procedures is needed along with a better understanding of the viewpoints of the various stakeholders in this process (patients, caregivers, clinicians, payers, dialysis organizations, and government regulators). Despite these barriers, telehealth has great potential to increase the acceptance of home dialysis, and improve outcomes and patient satisfaction while potentially decreasing costs. The Kidney Health Initiative convened a multidisciplinary workgroup to examine the current state of telehealth use in home RRTs as well as outline potential benefits and drawbacks, impediments to implementation, and key unanswered questions.

Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary disease management program on outcomes in patients with heart failure in China: A randomized controlled single center study

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary disease management programs (MDMP) for patients with heart failure (HF) have been delivered, but evidence of their effectiveness in China is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if a MDMP improves quality of life (QoL), physical performance, depressive symptoms, self-care behaviors and mortality or rehospitalization in patients with HF in China.

METHODS

This is a randomized controlled single center trial in which patients with HF received either MDMP with discharge education, physical training, follow-up visits and telephone calls for 180 days (n = 31) or standard care (SC, n = 31).

RESULTS

Compared with SC, QoL, depressive symptoms, and self-care behaviors were significantly improved by MDMP from baseline to 180 days (37% vs 66%, 20% vs 61%, and 8% vs 33%, respectively, all p < 0.001). There were no differences in physical performance and mortality or rehospitalization during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

A HF MDMP can improve QoL, depressive symptoms and self-care behaviors in China.

Palliative Care in Heart Failure: Rationale, Evidence, and Future Priorities

Patients with heart failure (HF) and their families experience stress and suffering from a variety of sources over the course of the HF experience. Palliative care is an interdisciplinary service and an overall approach to care that improves quality of life and alleviates suffering for those living with serious illness, regardless of prognosis. In this review, we synthesize the evidence from randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in HF. While the evidence base for palliative care in HF is promising, it is still in its infancy and requires additional high-quality, methodologically sound studies to clearly elucidate the role of palliative care for patients and families living with the burdens of HF. Yet, an increase in attention to primary palliative care (e.g., basic physical and emotional symptom management, advance care planning), provided by primary care and cardiology clinicians, may be a vehicle to address unmet palliative needs earlier and throughout the illness course.

Comparative Effectiveness of Telemonitoring Versus Usual Care for Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telemonitoring (TM) in the management of patients with heart failure (HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials published through May 2016. Outcomes of interest included clinical effectiveness (mortality, hospitalization, and emergency department visits) and patient-reported outcomes. TM was defined as the transmission of individual biologic data, such as weight, blood pressure, and heart rate. Thirty-seven randomized controlled trials (9582 patients) of TM met the inclusion criteria: 24 studies on all-cause mortality, 17 studies on all-cause hospitalization, 12 studies on HF-related hospitalization, and 5 studies on HF-related mortality. The risks of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.94) and HF-related mortality (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.91) were significantly lower in the TM group than in the usual care group. TM showed a significant benefit when ≥3 biologic data are transmitted or when transmission occurred daily. TM also reduced mortality risk in studies that monitored patients' symptoms, medication adherence, or prescription changes.

CONCLUSIONS

TM intervention reduces the mortality risk in patients with HF, and intensive monitoring with more frequent transmissions of patient data increases its effectiveness.

Primary palliative care for heart failure: what is it? How do we implement it?

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic and progressive illness, which affects a growing number of adults, and is associated with a high morbidity and mortality, as well as significant physical and psychological symptom burden on both patients with HF and their families. Palliative care is the multidisciplinary specialty focused on optimizing quality of life and reducing suffering for patients and families facing serious illness, regardless of prognosis. Palliative care can be delivered as (1) specialist palliative care in which a palliative care specialist with subspecialty palliative care training consults or co-manages patients to address palliative needs alongside clinicians who manage the underlying illness or (2) as primary palliative care in which the primary clinician (such as the internist, cardiologist, cardiology nurse, or HF specialist) caring for the patient with HF provides the essential palliative domains. In this paper, we describe the key domains of primary palliative care for patients with HF and offer some specific ways in which primary palliative care and specialist palliative care can be offered in this population. Although there is little research on HF primary palliative care, primary palliative care in HF offers a key opportunity to ensure that this population receives high-quality palliative care in spite of the growing numbers of patients with HF as well as the limited number of specialist palliative care providers.

Implantable Hemodynamic Monitoring for Heart Failure Patients

Rates of heart failure hospitalization remain unacceptably high. Such hospitalizations are associated with substantial patient, caregiver, and economic costs. Randomized controlled trials of noninvasive telemedical systems have failed to demonstrate reduced rates of hospitalization. The failure of these technologies may be due to the limitations of the signals measured. Intracardiac and pulmonary artery pressure-guided management has become a focus of hospitalization reduction in heart failure. Early studies using implantable hemodynamic monitors demonstrated the potential of pressure-based heart failure management, whereas subsequent studies confirmed the clinical utility of this approach. One large pivotal trial proved the safety and efficacy of pulmonary artery pressure-guided heart failure management, showing a marked reduction in heart failure hospitalizations in patients randomized to active pressure-guided management. "Next-generation" implantable hemodynamic monitors are in development, and novel approaches for the use of this data promise to expand the use of pressure-guided heart failure management.

Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Poor interprofessional collaboration (IPC) can adversely affect the delivery of health services and patient care. Interventions that address IPC problems have the potential to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of practice-based interventions designed to improve interprofessional collaboration (IPC) amongst health and social care professionals, compared to usual care or to an alternative intervention, on at least one of the following primary outcomes: patient health outcomes, clinical process or efficiency outcomes or secondary outcomes (collaborative behaviour).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2015, issue 11), MEDLINE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to November 2015. We handsearched relevant interprofessional journals to November 2015, and reviewed the reference lists of the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of practice-based IPC interventions involving health and social care professionals compared to usual care or to an alternative intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of each potentially relevant study. We extracted data from the included studies and assessed the risk of bias of each study. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis of study outcomes, given the small number of included studies and their heterogeneity in clinical settings, interventions and outcomes. Consequently, we summarised the study data and presented the results in a narrative format to report study methods, outcomes, impact and certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies in total (6540 participants); six cluster-randomised trials and three individual randomised trials (1 study randomised clinicians, 1 randomised patients, and 1 randomised clinicians and patients). All studies were conducted in high-income countries (Australia, Belgium, Sweden, UK and USA) across primary, secondary, tertiary and community care settings and had a follow-up of up to 12 months. Eight studies compared an IPC intervention with usual care and evaluated the effects of different practice-based IPC interventions: externally facilitated interprofessional activities (e.g. team action planning; 4 studies), interprofessional rounds (2 studies), interprofessional meetings (1 study), and interprofessional checklists (1 study). One study compared one type of interprofessional meeting with another type of interprofessional meeting. We assessed four studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and an equal number of studies to be at high risk of detection bias.For studies comparing an IPC intervention with usual care, functional status in stroke patients may be slightly improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities (1 study, 464 participants, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether patient-assessed quality of care (1 study, 1185 participants), continuity of care (1 study, 464 participants) or collaborative working (4 studies, 1936 participants) are improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities, as we graded the evidence as very low-certainty for these outcomes. Healthcare professionals' adherence to recommended practices may be slightly improved with externally facilitated interprofessional activities or interprofessional meetings (3 studies, 2576 participants, low certainty evidence). The use of healthcare resources may be slightly improved by externally facilitated interprofessional activities, interprofessional checklists and rounds (4 studies, 1679 participants, low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on patient mortality, morbidity or complication rates.Compared to multidisciplinary audio conferencing, multidisciplinary video conferencing may reduce the average length of treatment and may reduce the number of multidisciplinary conferences needed per patient and the patient length of stay. There was little or no difference between these interventions in the number of communications between health professionals (1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given that the certainty of evidence from the included studies was judged to be low to very low, there is not sufficient evidence to draw clear conclusions on the effects of IPC interventions. Neverthess, due to the difficulties health professionals encounter when collaborating in clinical practice, it is encouraging that research on the number of interventions to improve IPC has increased since this review was last updated. While this field is developing, further rigorous, mixed-method studies are required. Future studies should focus on longer acclimatisation periods before evaluating newly implemented IPC interventions, and use longer follow-up to generate a more informed understanding of the effects of IPC on clinical practice.

Patient-centered primary care for adults at high risk for AUDs: the Choosing Healthier Drinking Options In primary CarE (CHOICE) trial

BACKGROUND

Most patients with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) never receive alcohol treatment, and experts have recommended management of AUDs in primary care. The Choosing Healthier Drinking Options In primary CarE (CHOICE) trial was a randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a novel intervention for primary care patients at high risk for AUDs. This report describes the conceptual and scientific foundation of the CHOICE model of care, critical elements of the CHOICE trial design consistent with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), results of recruitment, and baseline characteristics of the enrolled sample.

METHODS

The CHOICE intervention is a multi-contact, extended counseling intervention, based on the Chronic Care Model, shared decision-making, motivational interviewing, and evidence-based options for managing AUDs, designed to be practical in primary care. Outpatients who received care at 3 Veterans Affairs primary care sites in the Pacific Northwest and reported frequent heavy drinking (≥4 drinks/day for women; ≥5 for men) were recruited (2011-2014) into a trial in which half of the participants would be offered additional alcohol-related care from a nurse. CHOICE nurses offered 12 months of patient-centered care, including proactive outreach and engagement, repeated brief motivational interventions, monitoring with and without alcohol biomarkers, medications for AUDs, and/or specialty alcohol treatment as appropriate and per patient preference. A CHOICE nurse practitioner was available to prescribe medications for AUDs.

RESULTS

A total of 304 patients consented to participate in the CHOICE trial. Among consenting participants, 90% were men, the mean age was 51 (range 22-75), and most met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol abuse (14%) or dependence (59%). Many participants also screened positive for tobacco use (44%), depression (45%), anxiety disorders (30-41%) and non-tobacco drug use disorders (19%). At baseline, participants had a median AUDIT score of 18 [Interquartile range (IQR) 14-24] and a median readiness to change drinking score of 5 (IQR 2.75-6.25) on a 1-10 Likert scale.

CONCLUSION

The CHOICE trial tested a patient-centered intervention for AUDs and recruited primary care patients at high risk for AUDs, with a spectrum of severity, co-morbidity, and readiness to change drinking. Trial registration The trial is registered at clinicaltrial.gov (NCT01400581).

Palliative Care in Heart Failure: What Triggers Specialist Consultation?

Heart failure (HF) continues to cause substantial death and suffering despite the availability of numerous medical, surgical, and technological therapeutic advancements. As a patient-centered holistic discipline focused on improving quality of life and decreasing anguish, palliative care (PC) has a crucial role in the care of HF patients that has been acknowledged by multiple international guidelines. PC can be provided by all members of the HF care team, including but not limited to practitioners with specialty PC training. Unfortunately, despite recommendations to routinely include PC techniques and providers in the care of HF patients, use of general PC strategies as well as expert PC consultation is limited by a dearth of evidence-based interventions in the HF population and knowledge as to when to initiate these interventions, uncertainty regarding patient desires, prognosis, and the respective roles of each member of the care team, and a general shortage of specialist PC providers. This review seeks to provide guidance as to when to employ the limited resource of specialist PC practitioners, in combination with services from other members of the care team, to best tend to HF patients as their disease progresses and eventually overcomes.