OBJECTIVE: To identify factors influencing cardiologists' and hospitalists' decisions regarding palliative care referral among hospitalised patients with advanced heart failure.
DESIGN: An exploratory, randomised vignette-based survey.
SETTING: Cardiology and hospitalist divisions at three Michigan State institutions and the Society of Hospital Medicine's Michigan Chapter.
PARTICIPANTS: 145 hospitalists and 64 cardiologists.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included participants' reports of their likelihood of referring a standardised patient with an acute heart failure exacerbation with multiple prior hospital admissions and acute renal failure to palliative care (scale of 0%-100%) after the initial stem and after being cued with three randomised vignette modifiers, including the presence versus the absence of continuity with an outpatient cardiologist; the presence versus the absence of documented advance care planning; and the patient voicing that he is accepting of his severe illness versus wanting everything done. Adjusted generalised linear models and predictive margins were used to evaluate the impact of each randomised modifier on referral decisions. An interaction term evaluated the effect of provider specialty on outcomes. Secondary outcomes included participants' reports of their general practices around palliative care delivery to hospitalised patients with heart failure.
RESULTS: Response rate was 31.3%. Predictive margins from generalised linear models demonstrated a statistically significantly higher likelihood of referral to inpatient palliative care if the patient lacked an outpatient cardiologist (mean difference: 6.3% (95% CI 1.8% to 10.8%)); had prior advance care planning documentation (mean difference: 9.7% (95% CI 4.4% to 15.0%)); and was accepting of illness severity (mean difference: 29.6% (95% CI 24.8% to 34.4%)). No interaction effect was noted based on provider specialty. Most hospitalists and cardiologists were unaware of palliative care guidelines for patients with heart failure (74.3% vs 70.3%, p=0.71).
CONCLUSIONS: A number of patient and provider factors influence palliative care referral decisions in hospitalised patients with advanced heart failure.
CONTEXT: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death globally and a significant health burden in Kenya. Despite improved outcomes in CVD, palliative care has limited implementation for CVD in low-income and middle-income countries. This may be partly because of providers' perceptions of palliative care and end-of-life decision making for patients with CVD.
OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to explore providers' perceptions of palliative care for CVD in Western Kenya to inform its implementation.
METHODS: We conducted eight focus group discussions and five key informant interviews. These were conducted by moderators using structured question guides. Qualitative analysis was performed using the constant comparative method. A coding scheme was developed and agreed on by consensus by two investigators, each of whom then independently coded each transcript. Relationships between codes were formulated, and codes were grouped into distinct themes. New codes were iteratively added with successive focus group or interview until thematic saturation was reached.
RESULTS: Four major themes emerged to explain the complexities of integrating of palliative care for patients with CVD in Kenya: 1) stigma of discussing death and dying, 2) mismatch between patient and clinician perceptions of disease severity, 3) the effects of poverty on care, and 4) challenges in training and practice environments. All clinicians expressed a need for integrating palliative care for patients with CVD.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that attainable interventions supported by local providers can help improve CVD care and quality of life for patients living with advanced heart disease in low-resource settings worldwide.
Background: The aim of this study was to examine palliative care involvement in patients with operative mortality after cardiac surgery, to gain a better understanding of this high-risk population and factors influencing referral.
Methods: This is a retrospective review using data submitted to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database.
Results: The total study population included 93 patients with operative mortality, only 30% of whom had palliative care involvement. The median time from first palliative care involvement to death was 6 days. Nearly 40% of patients had a status labeled as elective at the time of surgery.
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that patient mortality risk for elective surgery is being underestimated, or the indications for palliative care consultation in high-risk patients is going unrecognized. Such knowledge may facilitate earlier palliative care involvement, with the goal of improved quality of life for cardiac patients.
Background: Timely palliative care in frail older persons remains challenging. Scales to identify older patients at risk of functional decline already exist. However, factors to predict short term mortality in older hospitalized patients are scarce.
Methods: In this prospective study, we recruited patients of 75 years and older at the department of cardiology and geriatrics. The usual gait speed measurement closest to discharge was chosen. We used the risk of dying within 1 year as parameter for starting palliative care. ROC curves were used to determine the best cut-off value of usual gait speed to predict one-year mortality. Time to event analyses were assessed by COX regression.
Results: On the acute geriatric ward (n = 60), patients were older and more frail (assessed by Katz and iADL) in comparison to patients on the cardiology ward (n = 82); one-year mortality was respectively 27 and 15% (p = 0.069). AUC on the acute geriatric ward was 0.748 (p = 0.006). The best cut-off value was 0.42 m/s with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.857 and 0.643. Slow walkers died earlier than faster walkers (HR 7.456, p = 0.011), after correction for age and sex. On the cardiology ward, AUC was 0.560 (p = 0.563); no significant association was found between usual gait speed and survival time.
Conclusions: Usual gait speed may be a valuable prognostic factor to identify patients at risk for one-year mortality on the acute geriatric ward but not on the cardiology ward.
BACKGROUND: Dyads receiving palliative care for advanced heart failure are at risk for the loss of feeling safe, experienced as a fractured sense of coherence, discontinuity in sense of self and relationships, and strained social connections and altered roles. However, few theory-based interventions have addressed feeling safe in this vulnerable population.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to describe the development of the Nostalgic Remembering Intervention to strengthen feeling safe and promote adaptive physiological and psychological regulation in dyads receiving palliative care for heart failure.
CONCLUSIONS: Systematic intervention development is essential to understand what, for whom, why, and how an intervention works in producing outcomes. Program theory provided a systematic approach to the development of the Nostalgic Remembering Intervention, including conceptualization of the problem targeted by the intervention, specification of critical inputs and conditions that operationalize the intervention, and understanding the mediating processes leading to expected outcomes.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Creating a foundation for cardiovascular nursing research and practice requires continued, systematic development of theory-based interventions to best meet the needs of dyads receiving palliative care for heart failure. The development of the Nostalgic Remembering Intervention to strengthen feeling safe in dyads provides a novel and relevant approach.
Objectives: Palliative care (PC) has gained rising attention in a holistic treatment approach to chronic heart failure (HF). It is unclear whether there is a need for PC in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients or heart transplant recipients.
Methods: In a cross-sectional explorative pilot study, outpatients after heart transplantation (HTx, n = 69) or LVAD implantation (n = 21) underwent screening for palliative care (PC) need and evaluation of symptom burden and psychological distress using tools that emanated from palliative cancer care.
Results: The ‘Palliative Care Screening Tool for Heart Failure Patients’ revealed scores of 4.3 ± 2.2 in HTx and 6.0 ± 2.1 in LVAD patients (max. 12 points, P = 0.003), indicating the need for PC (=5 points) in 32% of HTx and 67% of LVAD patients. Symptom burden, as assessed by MIDOS (‘Minimal Documentation System for Palliative Care’) scores was substantial in both groups (4.9 ± 4.7 in HTx vs 6.6 ± 5.3 in LVAD, max. 30 points, P = 0.181). ‘Fatigue’, ‘weakness’ and ‘pain’ were the most frequent symptoms. Using the ‘Distress-Thermometer’, ‘clinically relevant’ distress was detected in 57% of HTx and 47% of LVAD patients (P = 0.445). In the PHQ-4 (‘4-Item Patient Health Questionnaire’), 45% of LVAD patients, compared to only 10% of HTx patients, reported mild symptoms of anxiety and depression.
Conclusions: Findings reveal substantial need for PC in LVAD patients and, to a lesser extent, in heart transplant recipients, suggesting that multi-disciplinary PC should be introduced into routine aftercare.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Palliative care is increasingly acknowledged as beneficial in supporting patients and families affected by heart failure, but policy documents have generally focused on the chronic form of this disease. We examined palliative care provision for those with acute heart failure, based on the recently updated National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care.
RECENT FINDINGS: The commonest reason for hospitalization in those > 65 years, acute heart failure admissions delineate crisis points on the unpredictable disease trajectory. Palliative care is underutilized, often perceived as limited to end-of-life care rather than determined by regular systematic needs assessment. No dominant paradigm of palliative care provision has emerged from the nascent evidence base related to this clinical cohort, underscoring the need for further research. Embedding palliative support as mainstream to heart failure care from the point of diagnosis may better ensure treatment strategies for those admitted with acute heart failure remain consistent with patients' preferences and values.
BACKGROUND: The delivery of palliative care interventions is not widely integrated in chronic heart failure care as the recognition of palliative care needs is perceived as difficult. Tools may facilitate healthcare professionals to identify patients with palliative care needs in advanced chronic heart failure.
AIM: To identify tools to help healthcare professionals recognize palliative care needs in patients with advanced chronic heart failure.
DESIGN: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019131896). Evidence of tools' development, evaluation, feasibility, and implementation was sought and described.
DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches to identify references of tools published until June 2019 were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE. Hand-searching of references and citations was undertaken. Based on the identified tools, a second electronic search until September 2019 was performed to check whether all evidence about these tools in the context of chronic heart failure was included.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies described a total of seven tools. The tools varied in purpose, intended user and properties. The tools have been validated to a limited extent in the context of chronic heart failure and palliative care. Different health care professionals applied the tools in various settings at different moments of the care process. Guidance and instruction about how to apply the tool revealed to be relevant but may be not enough for uptake. Spiritual care needs were perceived as difficult to assess.
CONCLUSION: Seven tools were identified which showed different and limited levels of validity in the context of palliative care and chronic heart failure.
OBJECTIVE: Determine the role of palliative care on terminal code status and setting of death for those with heart failure.
BACKGROUND: Although palliative care consultation (PCC) has increased for many conditions, PCC has not increased in those with cardiovascular disease. While it has been shown that the majority of those with heart failure die in medical facilities, the impact of PCC on terminal code status and setting of death requires further analysis.
METHODS: Patients admitted with heart failure between 2014-2015 at an academic VA Healthcare System were reviewed. Primary outcome was terminal code status. Secondary outcomes included setting of death, hospice utilization, and mortality scores. Student t-testing and Chi-square testing were performed where appropriate.
RESULTS: 334 patients were admitted with heart failure and had a median follow up time of 4.3 years. 196 patients died, with 122 (62%) receiving PCC and 74 (38%) without PCC. Patients were more likely to have terminal code statuses of comfort measures with PCC (OR = 4.6, p = 0.002), and less likely to be full code (OR = 0.09, p < 0.001). 146 patients had documented settings of death and were more likely to receive hospice services with PCC (OR 6.76, p < 0.001). A patient's chance of dying at home was not increased with PCC (OR 0.49, p = 0.07), but they were more likely to die with inpatient hospice (OR = 17.03; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Heart failure patients who received PCC are more likely to die with more defined care preferences and with hospice services. This does not translate to dying at home.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the content validity of the Symptom Control nursing outcome for heart failure patients in palliative care and to analyze the influence of experts' experience in the judgment of the relevance of indicators.
METHODS: A methodological study conducted in São Paulo in 2018, with an adaptation of Fehring's validation model. The relevance of the 11 outcome indicators was assessed by 19 experts by means of an electronically submitted survey. The influence of the experts' experience on judgment was analyzed by the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test and by Kendall's Tau correlation.
RESULTS: The indicators were considered pertinent; with 54.5% classified as critical. There was no association between the weighted means of the indicators and the experts' experience.
CONCLUSIONS: The indicators analyzed are relevant for the evaluation of the Symptom Control outcome in this group of patients. The experts' judgment was not influenced by their area of clinical experience or by their experience with the Nursing Outcomes Classification (NOC).
PURPOSE: Despite tremendous advances in medical and surgical care, some adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) develop terminal conditions where therapy is limited. This paper reviews the important role of palliative care, advance care planning (ACP), and end-of-life (EOL) care in ACHD.
RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies suggest that ACP is infrequently utilized in ACHD. Patients generally express interest in learning more about EOL care, though few ACHD providers have received adequate training to confidently conduct these discussions. Most barriers to communication are largely addressable, and an organized approach to ACP that encourages active patient participation followed by clear documentation is more likely to be successful. Palliative care appears complementary to standard medical care and can be introduced at any stage of illness, with proven benefit in similar patient populations. ACP is an important part of the routine care for all ACHD. Patient preferences should be identified early and palliative methods incorporated whenever necessary.
Background: Many patients with heart failure (HF) have not addressed end-of-life planning.
Objective: Evaluate the impact of an advance care planning (ACP) intervention on patients hospitalized with acute decompensated HF.
Methods: A convenience sample of patients hospitalized with HF completed the Advance Directive Attitude Survey (ADAS) before The Conversation Project intervention. Post-intervention scores were collected after 30 days.
Results: All participants (n = 30) had positive pre-intervention ADAS scores. Post-intervention scores revealed no significant change (p = 0.53). Twenty eight percent completed an advance directive (AD), 64% discussed the AD with a significant other, 40% established a surrogate decision maker, and 12% discussed the AD with a provider.
Conclusions: Advance directive completion rates were low despite participants having positive attitudes regarding their value. Discussion of goals between the patient and significant other is an important factor in end-of-life planning. Further studies are needed on strategies to improve provider discussions and AD completion.
OBJECTIVE: Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) need expert palliative care at the end of life. In the U.S., hospice may provide this care, but few patients enroll and information about hospice experience with LVAD-implanted patients is limited.
AIM: To describe hospice experience with LVAD-implanted patients.
METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive study of all LVAD-implanted patients admitted to a hospice agency. Data were extracted from the electronic health record.
RESULTS: The 13 patients had a mean age of 63 years (range 20 to 89) and a mean LVAD duration of 32.5 months (range 8.2 to 70.0). Hospice diagnosis was heart failure in 10 patients and cancer in 3; all patients were multimorbid. Eight patients enrolled in hospice on one occasion, four had two enrollments, and one had five. All patients received services for <180 days, three for <7 days and four patients for >90 days. Just-in-time in-servicing was used to prepare hospice teams for challenging care needs, including bleeding, delirium, infections and mechanical failure. Of the nine patients who died while receiving hospice services, one enrolled with a plan to deactivate the LVAD immediately after hospice enrollment and six died following discontinuation of the LVAD or other life-sustaining therapy during the course of hospice care. Five deaths occurred in a hospice inpatient unit.
CONCLUSION: To provide specialist palliative care to LVAD-implanted patients, hospices must be prepared to manage complex and highly varied needs. To do this, hospices must have adequate staff support and access to acute care.
An 87-year-old man with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and stage IV renal cell carcinoma presented to the emergency department with fever. On arrival, his temperature was 103 °F, his heart rate 120 beats per minute, and his blood pressure 80/56 mm Hg. His laboratory results were notable for a white blood cell count of 16 000/µL (to convert to ×109/L, multiply by 0.001) and urinalysis showing leukocyte esterase, nitrites, and bacteria. His condition initially improved with volume resuscitation and treatment with ceftriaxone and was admitted with sepsis presumed secondary to a urinary source. On admission, the patient reported that he had previously signed an out-of-hospital do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order and that he wanted to continue his DNR status while hospitalized.
Disconnecting a patient from artificial life support, on their request, is often if not always a matter of letting thcardiem die, not killing them-and sometimes, permissibly doing so. Stopping a patient's heart on request, by contrast, is a kind of killing, and rarely if ever a permissible one. The difference seems to be that procedures of the first kind remove an unwanted external support for bodily functioning, rather than intervening in the body itself. What should we say, however, about cases at the boundary-procedures involving items that seem bodily in some respects, but not others? When, for instance, does deactivating an implanted device like a pacemaker count as killing, and when as letting die? Contra existing proposals, I argue that the boundaries of the body for this purpose are not drawn at the boundaries of the self, or (if this is different) the human organism. Nor should we determine when we are killing and when we are letting die by deferring to existing practices for distinguishing ongoing from completed treatment. Rather, I argue that whether something (organic or inorganic) counts as body part for purposes of this distinction depends on the results of a normative analysis of the particular character of our rights in it-particularly, whether and in what way these rights ought to be alienable. I conclude by arguing that there are likely good reasons to recognize distinctively "bodily" rights and restrictions in at least some implantable devices.
There is limited evidence on the relationships of preference for end-of-life life-sustaining treatments [LSTs] and diagnostic contexts like heart failure [HF] or cancer, and patient attitudes toward and perceived susceptibility to use advance directives [ADs]. Thus, this study aimed to compare attitudes and perceived susceptibility between HF patients and community-dwelling patients with cancer, and examine the associations of these variables with their preference for each LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], ventilation support, hemodialysis, and hospice care). Secondary data were obtained from 36 outpatients with HF (mean age, 65.44 years; male, 69.4%) and 107 cancer patients (mean age, 67.39 years; male, 32.7%). More patients with HF preferred CPR than cancer patients (41.7% and 15.9%, 2 = 8.88, P = 0.003). Attitudes and perceived susceptibility were similar between the two diagnostic cohorts. HF patients and those with more positive attitudes had greater odds of preferring CPR (odds ratio [OR] = 3.02, confidence interval [CI] = 1.19, 7.70) and hospice care (OR = 1.14, CI = 1.06, 1.23), respectively. HF diagnosis and AD attitudes increased the preference for CPR and hospice care, respectively. This suggests that it is important to gain positive attitudes toward ADs and consider diagnostic context to facilitate informed decision-making for LSTs.
Background: Patients with heart failure have significant symptom burden, care needs, and often a progressive course to end-stage disease. Palliative care referrals may be helpful but it is currently unclear when patients should be referred and by whom. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to examine referral criteria for palliative care among patients with heart failure.
Methods: We searched Ovid, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed databases for articles in the English language from the inception of databases to January 17, 2019 related to palliative care referral in patients with heart failure. Two investigators independently reviewed each citation for inclusion and then extracted the referral criteria. Referral criteria were then categorized thematically.
Results: Of the 1199 citations in our initial search, 102 articles were included in the final sample. We identified 18 categories of referral criteria, including 7 needs-based criteria and 10 disease-based criteria. The most commonly discussed criterion was physical or emotional symptoms (n=51 [50%]), followed by cardiac stage (n=46 [45%]), hospital utilization (n=38 [37%]), prognosis (n=37 [36%]), and advanced cardiac therapies (n=36 [35%]). Under cardiac stage, 31 (30%) articles suggested New York Heart Association functional class =III and 12 (12%) recommended New York Heart Association class =IV as cutoffs for referral. Prognosis of =1 year was mentioned in 21 (21%) articles as a potential trigger; few other criteria had specific cutoffs.
Conclusions: This systematic review highlighted the lack of consensus regarding referral criteria for the involvement of palliative care in patients with heart failure. Further research is needed to identify appropriate and timely triggers for palliative care referral.
The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology has published a previous position paper and various guidelines over the past decade recognizing the value of palliative care for those affected by this burdensome condition. Integrating palliative care into evidence-based heart failure management remains challenging for many professionals, as it includes the identification of palliative care needs, symptom control, adjustment of drug and device therapy, advance care planning, family and informal caregiver support, and trying to ensure a "good death". This new position paper aims to provide day-to-day practical clinical guidance on these topics, supporting the coordinated provision of palliation strategies as goals of care fluctuate along the heart failure disease trajectory. The specific components of palliative care for symptom alleviation, spiritual and psychosocial support, and the appropriate modification of guideline-directed treatment protocols, including drug deprescription and device deactivation, are described for the chronic, crisis and terminal phases of heart failure.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Palliative care follows a philosophy of care that focuses upon the quality of life in patients with chronic or life-threatening illness. It also focuses upon the needs of their families which is a wider scope of care. Cardiovascular disease, and specifically heart failure, affects millions of patients and family members who have a symptom burden that exceeds that of many cancers and other chronic diseases.
RECENTLY FINDINGS: Historically palliative care has been viewed as an alternative to curative therapies, but over time, it is now recognized that it should be implemented earlier in the course of chronic diseases. Although non-oncologic patients now comprise over half of the patient seen by palliative care, patients with cardiovascular disease are still not being referred to palliative care. Palliative care goes beyond advance directives and end of life planning. There is a need to continue to expand the view of palliative care to encompass interventions that help improve the overall health of these patients, including their psychosocial well-being and quality of life. The collection of papers in this journal provides insight into the breadth of palliative care for patients with heart failure and other cardiovascular diseases.
Survival prospects in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD), although improved in recent decades, still remain below expectations for the general population. Patients and their loved ones benefit from preparation for both unexpected and predictable deaths, sometimes preceded by a prolonged period of declining health. Hence, advance care planning (ACP) is an integral part of comprehensive care for adults with CHD. This position paper summarizes evidence regarding benefits of and patients' preferences for ACP and provides practical advice regarding the implementation of ACP processes within clinical adult CHD practice. We suggest that ACP be delivered as a structured process across different stages, with content dependent upon the anticipated disease progression. We acknowledge potential barriers to initiate ACP discussions and emphasize the importance of a sensitive and situation-specific communication style. Conclusions presented in this article reflect agreed expert opinions and include both patient and provider perspectives.