Palliative care for older adults with cardiovascular disease.

Heart disease is the number one cause of death in the United States. Advanced cardiac conditions, such as heart failure, are characterized by severe symptoms, recurrent hospitalizations, limited/uncertain prognosis, decreased quality of life, and high levels of caregiver burden. The burden of heart failure is highest in older adults, for whom cardiovascular symptoms are layered on existing age-related problems such as geriatric syndromes, polypharmacy, depression, frailty, inadequate social support, decreased representation in clinical trials, and aging caregivers. Deliberate integration of outpatient and interdisciplinary geriatrics, palliative care, and cardiovascular care are essential for this special population. Life-prolonging and quality of life-focused approaches to managing cardiovascular disease are not mutually exclusive; many cardiology medications and treatments prolong life while also improving symptom burden. Symptom management, a cornerstone of palliative care, is therefore not only complementary to life-prolonging cardiology treatments, but also integral to optimized daily cardiovascular care. In this review, we aim to summarize relevant literature and provide practical tools that can be used by primary care clinicians, geriatricians, cardiologists and palliative care clinicians to optimize holistic outpatient care for adults who are aging with heart disease. While palliative care is appropriate for any age or stage of illness, we will focus on older adults with heart disease, and the nuances of managing their symptoms, goals of care, and quality of life.

Temporal Trends in Substance Use and Cardiovascular Disease-Related Mortality in the United States.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on substance use (SU) and cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related mortality trends in the United States. We aimed to evaluate SU+CVD-related deaths in the United States using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging, Online Data for Epidemiologic Research database. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Multiple Cause-of-Death Public Use record death certificates were used to identify deaths related to both SU and CVD. Crude, age-adjusted mortality rates, annual percent change, and average annual percent changes with a 95% CI were analyzed. Between 1999 and 2019, there were 636 572 SU+CVD-related deaths (75.6% men, 70.6% non-Hispanic White individuals, 65% related to alcohol). Age-adjusted mortality rates per 100 000 population were pronounced in men (22.5 [95% CI, 22.6-22.6]), American Indian or Alaska Native individuals (37.7 [95% CI, 37.0-38.4]), nonmetropolitan/rural areas (15.2 [95% CI, 15.1-15.3]), and alcohol-related death (9.09 [95% CI, 9.07 to 9.12]). The overall SU+CVD-related age-adjusted mortality rates increased from 9.9 (95% CI, 9.8-10.1) in 1999 to 21.4 (95% CI, 21.2-21.6) in 2019 with an average annual percent change of 4.0 (95% CI, 3.7-4.3). Increases in SU+CVD-related average annual percent change were noted across all subgroups and were pronounced among women (4.8% [95% CI, 4.5-5.1]), American Indian or Alaska Native individuals, younger individuals, nonmetropolitan areas, and cannabis and psychostimulant users. CONCLUSIONS: There was a prominent increase in SU+CVD-related mortality in the United States between 1999 and 2019. Women, non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native individuals, younger individuals, nonmetropolitan area residents, and users of cannabis and psychostimulants had pronounced increases in SU+CVD mortality.

Costs of care and financial hardship among patients with heart failure.

With the implementation of new therapies, more patients are living with heart failure (HF) as a chronic condition. Alongside these advances, out-of-pocket (OOP) medical costs have increased, and patients experience significant financial burden. Despite increasing interest in understanding and mitigating financial burdens, there is a relative paucity of data specific to HF. Here, we explore financial hardship in HF from the patient perspective, including estimated OOP costs for guideline-directed medical therapy for HF with reduced ejection fraction, hospitalizations, and total direct medical costs, as well as the consequences of high OOP costs. Studies estimate that high OOP costs are common in HF, and a large proportion are related to prescription drugs. Subsequently, the effects on patients can lead to worsening adherence, delayed care, and poor outcomes, leading to a financial toxicity spiral. Further, we summarize patients' cost preferences and outline future research that is needed to develop evidence-based solutions to reduce costs in HF.

Pharmacy and neighborhood-level variation in cash price of diabetes medications in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes medications place significant financial burden on patients but less is known about factors affecting cost variation. OBJECTIVE: To examine pharmacy and neighborhood factors associated with cost variation for diabetes drugs in the US. RESEARCH DESIGN, SUBJECTS AND MEASURES: We used all-payer US pharmacy data from 45,874 chain and independent pharmacies reflecting 7,073,909 deidentified claims. We divided diabetes drugs into insulins, non-insulin generic medications, and brand name medications. Generalized linear models, stratified by pharmacy type, identified pharmacy and neighborhood factors associated with higher or lower cash price-per-unit (PPU) for each set of drugs. RESULTS: Cash PPU was highest for brand name therapies ($149.4±203.2), followed by insulins ($42.4±25.0), and generic therapies ($1.3±4.4). Pharmacy-level price variation was greater for non-insulin generic therapies than insulins or brand name therapies. Chain pharmacies had both lower prices and lesser variation compared with independent pharmacies. CONCLUSIONS: Cash prices for diabetes medications in the US can vary considerably and that the greatest degree of price variation occurs in non-insulin generic therapies.

Gender-based differences in decision making, quality of life and survival among patients undergoing left ventricular assist device evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Women are less likely to receive left ventricular assist devices and are more likely to experience poor outcomes. However, how gender impacts LVAD decision-making regarding LVAD implantation and the effects of that decision remains unknown. METHODS: We performed a sub-group analysis from the stepped-wedge DECIDE-LVAD trial, which tested a decision-support intervention for patients considering LVAD therapy. RESULTS: Excluding 9 patients who withdrew from assessments, of the 239 patients analyzed, 203 (85%) were men and 36 (15%) were women. More men received LVADs (70%) than women (61%) and more men were alive at 6 months compared to women, both among those who received LVADs (87% vs 82%) and those who did not (74% vs 50%) (p = 0.002). Compared to men, women were more likely to have decision regret, depressive symptoms and perceived stress at baseline but not at follow-up. At 6-month follow-up, men experience improvements in decisional conflict, acceptance of illness, struggle with illness, and perceived stress-none of those improvements were noted amongst women. Compared to men who received LVADs, women receiving LVADs had worse decision regret and depressive symptoms at baseline and worse acceptance of illness and perceived stress at six months. Men who received LVADs experienced improvement in decisional conflict and perceived stress, while women did not experience these improvements. Both men and women who received LVADs experienced improvement in depressive symptoms. Quality of life as assessed by EuroQol visual analog scale improved for both men and women who received LVADs but not for those who did not receive LVADs; no gender differences in quality of life were noted. CONCLUSION: Women require greater decisional support at time of decision to undergo LVAD implantation and subsequently might benefit from more intensive psychosocial support.

Is There a Need for Palliative Care for Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction?

This Viewpoint discusses palliative care for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Association of Chronic Renal Insufficiency with Inhospital Outcomes in Primary Heart Failure Hospitalizations (Insights from the National Inpatient Sample 2004 to 2018).

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major co-morbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). There are limited contemporary data characterizing the clinical profile, inhospital outcomes, and resource use in patients hospitalized for HF with co-morbid CKD. We utilized a nationally representative population to address the knowledge gap. We examined the National Inpatient Sample 2004 to 2018 database to study the co-morbid profile, in-hospital mortality, clinical resource utilization, healthcare cost, and length of stay (LOS) in primary adult HF hospitalizations stratified by presence versus absence of a diagnosis codes of CKD. There were a total of 16,050,301 adult hospitalizations with a primary HF diagnosis from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2018. Of these, 428,175 (33.81%) had CKD; 1,110,778 (6.92%) had end-stage kidney disease (ESKD); and 9,511,348 (59.25%) had no diagnosis of CKD. Patients with hospitalizations for HF with ESKD were younger (mean age 65.4 years) compared with those without ESKD. In multivariable analysis, those with CKD had higher odds of inhospital mortality (2.82% vs 3.57%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.30, confidence interval [CI] 1.28 to 1.26, p <0.001), cardiogenic shock (1.01% vs 1.79% aOR 2.00, CI 1.95 to 2.05, p <0.001), and the need for mechanical circulatory support (0.4% vs 0.5%, aOR 1.51, 1.44 to 1.57, p <0.001) compared with those without CKD. In multivariable analysis, those with ESKD had higher odds of inhospital mortality (2.82% vs 3.84%, aOR 2.07, CI 2.01 to 2.12, p <0.001), need for invasive mechanical ventilation use (2.04% vs 3.94%, aOR 1.79, CI 1.75 to 1.84, p <0.001), cardiac arrest (0.72% vs 1.54%, aOR 2.09, CI 2.00 to 2.17, p <0.001), longer LOS (Adjusted mean difference 1.48, 1.44 to 1.53, p <0.001) and higher inflation-adjusted cost (Adjusted mean difference 3,411.63, CI 3,238.35 to 3,584.91, p <0.001) compared with those without CKD. CKD and ESKD affected about 40.7% of all primary HF hospitalizations from 2004 to 2018. The inhospital mortality, clinical complications, LOS, and inflation-adjusted cost were higher in hospitalized patients with ESKD compared with patients with and without CKD. In addition, compared with those without CKD, hospitalized patients with CKD had higher inhospital mortality, clinical complications, LOS, and inflation-adjusted cost compared with patients with no diagnosis of CKD.

Trends in ischemic heart disease among females in low-and middle-income countries from 1990 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a major contributor to mortality in low-and middle-income-countries (LMICs). However, trends in IHD in females in LMICs are not well described. METHODS: We analyzed the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study from 1990 to 2019 for males and females with IHD from the ten most-populous LMICs (India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, Iran, and Afghanistan). RESULTS: In females, IHD incidence increased from 950,000 cases/year to 1.6 million/year, IHD prevalence increased from 8 million to 22.5 million (181% increase) and IHD mortality from 428,320 to 1,040,817 (143% increase). IHD accounted for 6.2% of all deaths among females in 1990, doubling to 13.2% in 2019. IHD mortality for each country increased with the greatest shift in AAPC seen in the Philippines (5.8%, 95% CI 5.4-6.1) and India (3.7%, 95% CI 3.0-4.4). Notably, reductions in ASMR were greater for males than females in Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia and Nigeria. (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of IHD among females in LMIC has increased considerably in LMICs from 1990 to 2019. While the ASMR from IHD across most countries is declining, this was not uniformly noted. Furthermore, several countries noted lesser improvement in ASMR among females compared to males.

Financial Toxicity of Medical Management of Heart Failure: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Optimal medical management of heart failure (HF) improves quality of life, decreases mortality, and decreases hospitalizations. Cost may contribute to suboptimal adherence to HF medications, especially angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Patients' experiences with HF medication cost include financial burden, financial strain, and financial toxicity. Although there has been research studying financial toxicity in patients with some chronic diseases, there are no validated tools for measuring financial toxicity of HF, and very few data on the subjective experiences of patients with HF and financial toxicity. Strategies to decrease HF-associated financial toxicity include making systemic changes to minimize cost sharing, optimizing shared decision-making, implementing policies to lower drug costs, broadening insurance coverage, and using financial navigation services and discount programs. Clinicians may also improve patient financial wellness through various strategies in routine clinical care. Future research is needed to study financial toxicity and associated patient experiences for HF.

Association of Psychosocial Risk Factors and Outcomes in Heart Failure: Does COVID-19 Affect Outcomes?

Psychosocial risk factors (PSRFs) have emerged as crucial nontraditional risk factors affecting outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). There is a paucity of data studying these risk factors in HF nationally. Additionally, whether the COVID-19 pandemic impacted outcomes remains unexplored, given the increased psychosocial risk during these times. Our objective is to assess the impact of PSRFs on the outcomes of HF and their comparison across non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras. Patients with a diagnosis of HF were selected using the 2019-2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Two cohorts were created based on the presence or absence of PSRFs and compared across non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras. We examined the association using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models. A total of 305,955 patients were included, of which 175,348 (57%) had PSRFs. Patients with PSRFs were younger, less likely to be female, and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. All-cause readmissions were higher in patients with PSRFs in both the eras. All-cause mortality [odds ratio, OR 1.15 (1.04-1.27), P = 0.005] and composite of MACE [OR 1.11 (1.06-1.16), P < 0.001] were higher in patients in the non-COVID-19 era. Compared to 2019, patients with PSRFs and HF in 2020 had significantly higher all-cause mortality [OR 1.13 (1.03-1.24), P = 0.009]; however, the composite of MACE was comparable [OR 1.04 (1.00-1.09), P = 0.03]. In conclusion, the presence of PSRFs in patients with HF is associated with a significant increase in all-cause readmissions in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 eras. The worse outcomes evident in the COVID-19 era highlights the importance of multidisciplinary care in this vulnerable population.

Experiences of Medical Interpreters During Palliative Care Encounters With Limited English Proficiency Patients: A Qualitative Study.

Background: There are many challenges in communication and cultural barriers for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) who suffer from serious illnesses. Palliative care utilization among this population remains limited and the experiences of medical interpreters during palliative care encounters remain understudied. Methods: We conducted semistructured video interviews with interpreters working at an academic medical center. Interview questions explored interpreters' observations and experiences during palliative care encounters with LEP patients. We performed thematic analysis of the interview contents. Results: Our study included 20 interpreters who interpret in 9 languages with a mean experience of 16.3 years. We identified four themes from the interviews that shed light on the challenges of incorporating palliative care into the care of patients with LEP: (1) lack of a verbatim interpretation for the term "palliative care," (2) poor patient understanding of their treatment goals, (3) suboptimal timing of palliative care involvement, and (4) fears and misconceptions related to palliative care. Owing to challenges in word choice, the timing of palliative care involvement, and poor understanding of palliative care, interpreters observed that many patients with LEP declined palliative care involvement in their treatment plan. Conclusions: In this study, we identified several actionable barriers interpreters noted to incorporating palliative care into care of patients with LEP. Interventions directed toward providing LEP patients with standardized culturally appropriate information on palliative care are needed.

Palliative Care for Patients With Heart Failure: Results From a Heart Failure Society of America Survey.

BACKGROUND: Multiple guidelines recommend specialty palliative care (PC) for patients with heart failure (HF), including patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). However, the degree of integration and clinicians' perceptions of PC in HF care remain incompletely characterized. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 36-item survey was sent to 2109 members of the Heart Failure Society of America. Eighty respondents (53% physicians), including 51 respondents from at least 42 medical centers, completed the survey, with the majority practicing in urban (76%) academic medical centers (62%) that implanted LVADs (81%). Among the 42 unique medical centers identified, respondents reported both independent (40%) and integrated (40%) outpatient PC clinic models, whereas 12% reported not having outpatient PC at their institutions. A minority (12%) reported that their institution used triggered PC referrals based on objective clinical data. Of respondents from LVAD sites, the majority reported that a clinician from the PC team was required to see all patients prior to implantation, but there was variability in practices. Among all respondents, the most common reasons for PC referral in HF were poor prognosis, consideration of advanced cardiac therapies or other high-risk procedures and advance-care planning or goals-of-care discussions. The most frequent perceived barriers to PC consultation included lack of PC clinicians, unpredictable HF clinical trajectories and limited understanding of how PC can complement traditional HF care. CONCLUSION: PC integration and clinician perceptions of services vary in HF care. More research and guidance regarding evidence-based models of PC delivery in HF are needed.

Geospatial Analysis of Access to Health Care and Internet Services in the US.

This cross-sectional study examines internet access in areas of the US with limited health care services.

Challenges for Patients Dying of Heart Failure and Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hospice and palliative care were originally implemented for patients dying of cancer, both of which continue to be underused in patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of this study was to understand the unique challenges faced by patients dying of HF compared with cancer. METHODS: We assessed differences in demographics, health status, and financial burden between patients dying of HF and cancer from the Health and Retirement Study. RESULTS: The analysis included 3203 individuals who died of cancer and 3555 individuals who died of HF between 1994 and 2014. Compared with patients dying of cancer, patients dying of HF were older (80 years versus 76 years), had poorer self-reported health, and had greater difficulty with all activities of daily living while receiving less informal help. Their death was far more likely to be considered unexpected (39% versus 70%) and they were much more likely to have died without warning or within 1 to 2 hours (20% versus 1%). They were more likely to die in a hospital or nursing home than at home or in hospice. Both groups faced similarly high total healthcare out-of-pockets costs ($9988 versus $9595, P=0.6) though patients dying of HF had less wealth ($29 895 versus $39 008), thereby experiencing greater financial burden. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients dying of cancer, those dying from HF are older, have greater difficulty with activities of daily living, are more likely to die suddenly, in a hospital or nursing home rather than home or hospice, and had worse financial burden.