Screening and Initiating Supportive Care in Patients With Heart Failure

Uptake of SGLT2i and Outcomes in Patients with Diabetes and Heart Failure: A Population-Based Cohort and a Specialized Clinic Cohort

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are effective in adults with diabetes mellitus (DM) and heart failure (HF) based on randomized clinical trials. We compared SGLT2 inhibitor uptake and outcomes in two cohorts: a population-based cohort of all adults with DM and HF in Alberta, Canada and a specialized heart function clinic (HFC) cohort.

METHODS

The population-based cohort was derived from linked provincial healthcare datasets. The specialized clinic cohort was created by chart review of consecutive patients prospectively enrolled in the HFC between February 2018 and August 2022. We examined the association between SGLT2 inhibitor use (modeled as a time-varying covariate) and all-cause mortality or deaths/cardiovascular hospitalizations.

RESULTS

Of the 4,885 individuals from the population-based cohort, 64.2% met the eligibility criteria of the trials proving the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors. Utilization of SGLT2 inhibitors increased from 1.2% in 2017 to 26.4% by January 2022. In comparison, of the 530 patients followed in the HFC, SGLT2 inhibitor use increased from 9.8% in 2019 to 49.1 % by March 2022. SGLT2 inhibitor use in the population-based cohort was associated with fewer all-cause mortality (aHR 0.51, 95%CI 0.41-0.63) and deaths/cardiovascular hospitalizations (aHR 0.65, 95%CI 0.54-0.77). However, SGLT2 inhibitor usage rates were far lower in HF patients without DM (3.5% by March 2022 in the HFC cohort).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite robust randomized trial evidence of clinical benefit, the uptake of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HF and DM remains low, even in the specialized HFC. Clinical care strategies are needed to enhance the use of SGLT2 inhibitors and improve implementation.

The Use of Person-Centered Outcome Measures to Support Integrated Palliative Care for Older People: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to synthesize evidence on the use of person-centered outcome measures to facilitate integrated palliative care for older people and build a logic model depicting the mechanisms through which person-centered outcome measures support integrated care.

DESIGN

Mixed methods systematic review using a data-based convergent synthesis design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Older people aged ≥60 years who are approaching the end of their lives in multiple settings.

METHODS

The study was underpinned by a conceptual framework of integrated palliative care, which informed the search strategy, data extraction, analysis, and synthesis. A hybrid search strategy was implemented, with database searches (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and ASSIA) complemented by snowball searches. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed by narrative synthesis to summarize and explain the findings. The findings informed a logic model depicting the mechanisms of using person-centered outcome measures to support integrated palliative care.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Three mixed methods studies, 2 qualitative studies, and 21 quantitative studies were included. There was evidence that person-centered outcome measures could support integrated palliative care through informing palliative care policy development (n = 4), facilitating joint working across settings (n = 5), enabling close collaboration of multidisciplinary teams (n = 14), promoting joint education (n = 1), facilitating timing and specialist referral (n = 6), and enhancing patient-centered care (n = 3).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This review makes an important, novel, and theoretically informed contribution to the delivery of scalable and sustainable integrated palliative care into the care of older people using person-centered outcome measures. The constructed logic model provides a conceptual framework and practical approach to how person-centered outcome measures support multilevel integration. A future area of research is the development of person-centered outcome measure interventions informed by the logic model to meet clinical needs.

A mixed-methods landscape assessment of supportive care for heart failure

Aim: Understanding factors that shape leading health systems' (LHS) perspectives around heart failure (HF) treatment. Patients & methods: First of its kind study using a cross-sectional, descriptive, mixed-method design (from executives and frontline healthcare providers) with quantitative survey (n = 35) and qualitative interview (n = 12) data from 47 participants (41 different LHS). Results: 97% of LHS had dedicated HF programs, but variations in maturity highlights opportunities for care standardization. Treatment innovations continue, though practitioners may struggle to keep pace amid provider/patient barriers. HF programs strive to co-locate supportive care services to optimize treatment, but access can prove challenging. Conclusion: Opportunities exist, with external partner support, for LHS to become more comprehensive HF care providers, increasing standardization of care across LHS and improved HF treatment.

[Assessment tools for palliative care needs in patients with heart failure in general practice]

Palliative care of patients with non-oncological, chronic diseases is for the most part achieved by general practicioners (GP). Currently however standardized questionnaires are barely used by GPs to determine the demand. It is far more an intuitive, individual decision, at what time and to what extend a palliative treatment takes place at home. Based on an example of a patient with chronic heart failure, it's determined, if and with which assessment-tools the need for a (specialised) palliative care in general medicine can be detected.