Community matrons as problem-solvers for people living with multi-co-morbid disease.

Working with patients in their own homes gives community matrons an advantage of seeing patients in the context of their everyday lives. This allows comprehensive assessment of need with an aim of promoting health or promoting stability for people living with chronic disease. Complex issues are resolved through problem-solving and this can result in patients being maintained in their own homes and thus in reduced unplanned hospitalisation. Data were collected from participants using semi-structured interviews and audio diaries. The sample comprised professionals: CMs (n=21), managers (n=4), former commissioners (n=2) and GPs (n=3); and patients (n=10) and their family carers (n=5). In this article, data from community matrons is discussed. Community matrons often drew on the social determinants model of health to problem solve and to create meaningful strategies that work for patients in their care. Raising awareness of the high-level skills of community matrons and promoting appreciation of the importance of a social determinants model of health is important in explaining why nurses are such a crucial element of the primary health care workforce.

'I can't walk away': understanding the complexities in embedding a new nurse role.

BACKGROUND: The community matron (CM) role was introduced in England to provide a single point of access to patients living with comorbid long-term conditions who had, or were at risk of, frequent emergency hospitalisation. AIM: This study explored the factors that affected embedding of the CM role. The qualitative study was undertaken in community health services in two cities and a rural area in central England. METHOD: Participants comprised health professionals (n=30) including CMs, community service managers, and service commissioners; patients (n=10); and their family carers (n=5). RESULTS: Findings reveal that participants were largely positive about the role. However, difficulties with role setup had led to numerous changes in service delivery, which affected how the role has embedded. CONCLUSION: Many aspects of the CM role are invisible to other health professionals. Invisibility of community nursing, rather than autonomy of the CM role, seems to be a key factor in the challenges of embedding the role.

An intervention to reassure patients about test results in rapid access chest pain clinic: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people referred to rapid access chest pain clinics have non-cardiac chest pain, and in those diagnosed with stable coronary heart disease, guidance recommends that first-line treatment is usually medication rather than revascularisation. Consequently, many patients are not reassured they have the correct diagnosis or treatment. A previous trial reported that, in people with non-cardiac chest pain, a brief discussion with a health psychologist before the tests about the meaning of potential results led to people being significantly more reassured. The aim of this pilot was to test study procedures and inform sample size for a future multi-centre trial and to gain initial estimates of effectiveness of the discussion intervention. METHODS: This was a two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial in outpatient rapid access chest pain clinic in 120 people undergoing investigation for new onset, non-urgent chest pain. Eligible participants were randomised to receive either: a discussion about the meaning and implication of test results, delivered by a nurse before tests in clinic, plus a pre-test pamphlet covering the same information (Discussion arm) or the pre-test pamphlet alone (Pamphlet arm). Main outcome measures were recruitment rate and feasibility for a future multi-centre trial, with an estimate of reassurance in the groups at month 1 and 6 using a 5-item patient-reported scale. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy people attended rapid access chest pain clinic during recruitment and 120/270 participants (44%) were randomised, 60 to each arm. There was no evidence of a difference between the Discussion and Pamphlet arms in the mean reassurance score at month 1 (34.2 vs 33.7) or at month 6 (35.3 vs 35.9). Patient-reported chest pain and use of heart medications were also similar between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: A larger trial of the discussion intervention in the UK would not be warranted. Patients reported high levels of reassurance which were similar in patients receiving the discussion with a nurse and in those receiving a pamphlet alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60618114 (assigned 27.05.2011).

Participants' experiences of care during a randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with usual care: a qualitative study using focus groups.

AIM: This paper is a report of a qualitative study conducted as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with usual care. Its aim was to explore participants' beliefs, experiences, and attitudes to the care they had received during the trial, particularly those who had received the angina management intervention. BACKGROUND: Angina affects over 50 million people worldwide. Over half of these people have symptoms that restrict their daily life and would benefit from knowing how to manage their condition. DESIGN: A nested qualitative study within a randomized controlled trial of lay-facilitated angina management. METHOD: We conducted four participant focus groups during 2008; three were with people randomized to the intervention and one with those randomized to control. We recruited a total of 14 participants to the focus groups, 10 intervention, and 4 control. FINDINGS: Although recruitment to the focus groups was relatively low by comparison to conventional standards, each generated lively discussions and a rich data set. Data analysis demonstrated both similarities and differences between control and intervention groups. Similarities included low levels of prior knowledge about angina, whereas differences included a perception among intervention participants that lifestyle changes were more easily facilitated with the help and support of a lay-worker. CONCLUSION: Lay facilitation with the Angina Plan is perceived by the participants to be beneficial in supporting self-management. However, clinical expertise is still required to meet the more complex information and care needs of people with stable angina.

Randomized controlled trial of a lay-facilitated angina management programme.

AIMS: This article reports a randomized controlled trial of lay-facilitated angina management (registered trial acronym: LAMP). BACKGROUND: Previously, a nurse-facilitated angina programme was shown to reduce angina while increasing physical activity, however most people with angina do not receive a cardiac rehabilitation or self-management programme. Lay people are increasingly being trained to facilitate self-management programmes. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial comparing a lay-facilitated angina management programme with routine care from an angina nurse specialist. METHODS: Participants with new stable angina were randomized to the angina management programme (intervention: 70 participants) or advice from an angina nurse specialist (control: 72 participants). Primary outcome was angina frequency at 6 months; secondary outcomes at 3 and 6 months included: risk factors, physical functioning, anxiety, depression, angina misconceptions and cost utility. Follow-up was complete in March 2009. Analysis was by intention-to-treat; blind to group allocation. RESULTS: There was no important difference in angina frequency at 6 months. Secondary outcomes, assessed by either linear or logistic regression models, demonstrated important differences favouring the intervention group, at 3 months for: Anxiety, angina misconceptions and for exercise report; and at 6 months for: anxiety; depression; and angina misconceptions. The intervention was considered cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The angina management programme produced some superior benefits when compared to advice from a specialist nurse.

Complexities of patient choice in cardiac rehabilitation: qualitative findings.

AIM: This paper is a report of a study of the choices patients make when offered home-based or hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation. BACKGROUND: In some countries, patients may be offered a choice of home-based or hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation. While evaluating a home-based programme, Road to Recovery, developed by the British Heart Foundation, we examined patients' experiences of being offered this choice. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 35 patients and 12 staff members delivering the pilot programme in five rehabilitation services during 2006-2008. FINDINGS: While the staff members interviewed reported that all patients were given a clear choice between a home-based and hospital-based or community-based programme, this choice was less clear-cut in the patient interviews. When choice was offered, the choice of a home-based programme was often based on constraints rather than on being a positive choice. Obstacles patients faced in making the choice included lack of information on which to base a choice; inadequate systems of referral; insufficient appropriately trained staff; restricted choice of times to attend the hospital programmes; the geographical location of services and restrictive socio-economic factors (inflexible working hours, access to transport). CONCLUSION: The possibility of informed choice relies in the first instance on the availability and accessibility of appropriate services. Nurses need awareness and commitment to finding out about and overcoming obstacles that impede patient participation in cardiac rehabilitation. Only in this manner will it be possible to fulfil the calls in national and some international clinical guidelines for 'individualized' or 'menu-based' programmes tailored to specific patient needs.

Randomized controlled trials of interventions to change maladaptive illness beliefs in people with coronary heart disease: systematic review.

AIM: This paper is a report of a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of interventions to change maladaptive illness beliefs in people with coronary heart disease, and was conducted to determine whether such interventions were effective in changing maladaptive beliefs, and to assess any consequent change in coping and outcome. BACKGROUND: An increasing body of evidence suggests that faulty beliefs can lead to maladaptive behaviours and, in turn, to poor outcomes. However, the effectiveness of interventions to change such faulty illness beliefs in people with coronary heart disease is unknown. DATA SOURCES: Multiple data bases were searched using a systematic search strategy. In addition, reference lists of included papers were checked and key authors in the field contacted. REVIEW METHODS: The systematic review included randomized controlled trials with adults of any age with a diagnosis of coronary heart disease and an intervention aimed at changing cardiac beliefs. The primary outcome measured was change in beliefs about coronary heart disease. RESULTS: Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Owing to the heterogeneity of these studies, quantitative synthesis was not practicable. Descriptive synthesis of the results suggested that cognitive behavioural and counselling/education interventions can be effective in changing beliefs. The effects of changing beliefs on behavioural, functional and psychological outcomes remain unclear. CONCLUSION: While some interventions may be effective in changing beliefs in people with coronary heart disease, the effect of these changes on outcome is not clear. Further high quality research is required before firmer guidance can be given to clinicians on the most effective method to dispel cardiac misconceptions.

Misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about heart disease: a comparison between Taiwan and Britain.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about coronary heart disease between Taiwanese and British people with heart disease. BACKGROUND: Holding misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about heart disease has deleterious effects on a patient's quality of life. Cultural contexts influence a person's responses to illness, but little information exists about the ways in which cultural values influence a person's attributions and coping behaviours regarding their heart disease. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey using a descriptive comparative design was carried out in Taiwan and Britain. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was used to elicit misconceived or potentially maladaptive beliefs about heart disease. People with a confirmed diagnosis of coronary heart disease were recruited from a teaching hospital in Taipei (n = 238) and a tertiary cardiothoracic centre in the North of England (n = 204). RESULTS: Taiwanese patients held more misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about heart disease than those in Britain. Both British and Taiwanese patients showed high agreement on 'stress is one of the main causes of heart disease' and 'always avoid stress', but these beliefs were more common in Taiwanese patients (p < 0.001). Misconceptions about avoiding anything that might bring on angina were common in both countries. CONCLUSIONS: While there were some similarities in the cardiac beliefs held by the two groups of patients, Taiwanese patients held significantly more misconceptions. This may be explained by differences between the patients' cultures, including social norms, health care provision and health information from the media. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Interventions should be developed to dispel maladaptive beliefs thereby altering the coping actions of patients. The meaning and purpose of specific behaviours needs to be interpreted within the context of a patient's culture. Awareness of cultural perspectives may help to develop nursing care plans that are more successful as they are more individually applicable to patients.

Health, not weight loss, focused programmes versus conventional weight loss programmes for cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a cardiovascular disease risk factor. Conventional weight loss (CWL) programmes focus on weight loss, however 'health, not weight loss, focused' (HNWL) programmes concentrate on improved health and well-being, irrespective of weight loss. What are the differences in CVD risk outcomes between these programmes? AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of HNWL with CWL programmes on cardiovascular disease risk factors. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ASSIA, clinical trial registers, commercial websites and reference lists for randomised controlled trials comparing the two programmes (initially searched up to August 2015 and searched updated to 5 April 2019). We used the Mantel-Haneszel fixed-effect model to pool results. Sub-group and sensitivity analyses that accounted for variations in length of follow-up, enhanced programmes and risk of bias dealt with heterogeneity. RESULTS: Eight randomised controlled trials of 20,242 potential studies were included. Improvements in total cholesterol-HDL ratio (mean difference - 0.21 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval [- 3.91, 3.50]) and weight loss (- 0.28 kg [- 2.00, 1.44]) favoured HNWL compared to CWL programmes in the long term (53-104 week follow-up), whereas improvements in systolic (- 1.14 mmHg, [- 5.84, 3.56]) and diastolic (- 0.15 mmHg, [- 3.64, 3.34]) blood pressure favoured CWL programmes. These differences did not reach statistical significance. Statistically significant improvements in body satisfaction (- 4.30 [- 8.32, - 0.28]) and restrained eating behaviour (- 4.30 [- 6.77, - 1.83]) favoured HNWL over CWL programmes. CONCLUSIONS: We found no long-term significant differences in improved CVD risk factors; however, body satisfaction and restrained eating behaviour improved more with HNWL compared to CWL programmes. Yet firm conclusions cannot be drawn from small studies with high losses to follow-up and data sometimes arising from a single small study. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015019505.

Standards and core components for cardiovascular disease prevention and rehabilitation.

In 2017, the British Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation published its official document detailing standards and core components for cardiovascular prevention and rehabilitation. Building on the success of previous editions of this document (published in 2007 and 2012), the 2017 update aims to further emphasise to commissioners, clinicians, politicians and the public the importance of robust, quality indicators of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) service delivery. Otherwise, its overall aim remains consistent with the previous publications-to provide a precedent on which all effective cardiovascular prevention and rehabilitation programmes are based and a framework for use in assessment of variation in service delivery quality. In this 2017 edition, the previously described seven standards and core components have both been revised to six, with a greater focus on measurable clinical outcomes, audit and certification. The principles within the updated document underpin the six-stage pathway of care for CR, and reflect the extensive evidence base now available within the field. To help improve current services, close collaboration between commissioners and CR providers is advocated, with use of the CR costing tool in financial planning of programmes. The document specifies how quality assurance can be facilitated through local audit, and advocates routine upload of individual-level data to the annual British Heart Foundation National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation, and application for national certification ensuring attainment of a minimum quality standard. Although developed for the UK, these standards and core components may be applicable to other countries.

The need for novel strategies to address postoperative pain associated with cardiac surgery: A commentary and introduction to "SMArTVIEW".

Background: With coronary heart disease affecting over 2.4 million Canadians, annual cardiac and major vascular surgery rates are on the rise. Unrelieved postoperative pain is among the top five causes of hospital readmission following surgery; little is done to address this postoperative complication. Barriers to effective pain assessment and management following cardiac and major vascular surgery have been conceptualized on patient, health care provider, and system levels. Purpose: In this commentary, we review common patient, health care provider, and system-level barriers to effective postoperative pain assessment and management following cardiac and major vascular surgery. We then outline the SMArTVIEW intervention, with particular attention to components designed to optimize postoperative pain assessment and management. Methods: In conceptualizing the SMArTVIEW intervention design, we sought to address a number of these barriers by meeting the following design objectives: (1) orchestrating a structured process for regular postoperative pain assessment and management; (2) ensuring adequate clinician preparation for postoperative pain assessment and management in the context of virtual care; and (3) enfranchising patients to become active self-managers and to work with their health care providers to manage their pain postoperatively. Conclusions: Innovative approaches to address these barriers are a current challenge to health care providers and researchers alike. SMArTVIEW is spearheading this paradigm shift within clinical research to address barriers that impair effective postoperative pain management by actively engaging health care providers and patients in an accessible format (i.e., digital health solution) to give primacy to the need of postoperative pain assessment and management following cardiac and major vascular surgery.

Contexte: Alors que la maladie cardiaque coronarienne touche plus de 2,4 millions de Canadiens, les taux annuels de chirurgie cardiaque et de chirurgie vasculaire majeure sont en augmentation. Bien que la douleur postopératoire non soulagée compte parmi les cinq principales causes de réadmission à l'hôpital après une chirurgie, peu de choses sont faites pour remédier à cette complication postopératoire. Les barrières à l'évaluation et à la prise en charge efficaces de la douleur après une chirurgie cardiaque ou une chirurgie vasculaire majeure ont été conceptualisées aux niveaux du patient, du prestataire de soins et du système.But: Dans ce commentaire, nous examinons les barrières à l'évaluation et à la prise en charge efficace de la douleur postopératoire après une chirurgie cardiaque et une chirurgie vasculaire majeure au niveau du patient, du prestataire de soins et du système. Nous présentons ensuite l'intervention SMArTVIEW, en portant une attention particulière aux composantes conçues pour optimiser l'évaluation et la prise en charge de la douleur postopératoire.Méthodes: Au moment de conceptualiser l'intervention SMArTIEW, nous avons cherché à remédier à un certain nombre de ces barrières à partir des objectifs de conception suivants : 1) orchestrer un processus structuré pour l'évaluation et la prise en charge de la douleur postopératoire régulière; 2) assurer une préparation adéquate des cliniciens pour l'évaluation et la prise en charge de la douleur postopératoire dans un contexte de soins virtuels; et 3) affranchir les patients afin qu'ils puissent activement prendre en charge leur douleur postopératoire et travailler de concert avec les prestataires de soins.Conclusions: Les approches innovantes pour remédier à ces barrières sont un défi constant, tant pour les prestataires de soins que pour les chercheurs. SMArTVIEW est à l'avant-garde de ce changement de paradigme dans la recherche clinique qui a pour but de remédier aux barrières qui nuisent à la prise en charge efficace de la douleur postopératoire en engageant activement les prestataires de soins et les patients dans un format accessible (i.e. solution de santé numérique), afin que la primauté soit accordée à la nécessité d'évaluer et de prendre en charge la douleur postopératoire après une chirurgie cardiaque ou une chirurgie vasculaire majeure.

Development and validation of a patient-centered health-related quality-of-life measure: the chronic heart failure assessment tool.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the importance of health-related quality of life (HRQL) as an outcome measure in chronic heart failure (CHF), instruments currently available have been developed by clinicians or researchers; none have been derived from the patient's perspective. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a patient-derived, disease-specific HRQL measure. METHODS: The psychometric testing of the Chronic Heart Failure Assessment Tool (CHAT) followed 2 phases: testing the psychometric properties (n = 223) of the 51-item version of the CHAT in a postal survey and validation of the CHAT (n = 68) using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey and the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure questionnaire. RESULTS: The CHAT contains questions measuring 7 themes of HRQL: physical ability, emotional state, self-perception, relationships, coping with symptoms, maintaining social/lifestyle status, and cognitive aspects in respect to CHF. Factor analysis was used to analyze these themes. Four domains emerged: symptoms, activity levels, psychosocial aspects, and emotions. CONCLUSION: The CHAT comprises dimensions of HRQL identified by patients in the study population that may more appropriately reflect the concerns of patients. Further work is recommended to develop this tool for use as an HRQL measure in a CHF population.

Cardiac misconceptions: comparisons among nurses, nursing students and people with heart disease in Taiwan.

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to examine the misconceived and potentially maladaptive beliefs (cardiac misconceptions) about heart disease held by nurses, nursing students and people with heart disease in Taiwan. BACKGROUND: Research suggests that misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about heart disease influence outcomes in people with heart disease, and that eliciting and dispelling incorrect beliefs can reduce disability in this population. However, nurses do not routinely elicit maladaptive beliefs or attempt to dispel them. METHOD: Between October 2005 and March 2006, a survey was conducted using version 1 of the York Cardiac Beliefs Questionnaire to measure cardiac misconceptions in 64 hospital-based nurses (13 of whom were cardiac nurses), 134 nursing students and 238 people with heart disease. RESULTS: Nursing students held fewer cardiac misconceptions than nurses (P = 0.042). There were no statistically significant differences in the numbers of misconceptions between cardiac and general nurses, and no statistically significant associations between level of qualification, years of nursing experience and number of misconceptions. Nurses with higher levels of education were more likely to hold fewer misconceptions (P = 0.24). Patients held statistically significantly more misconceptions about heart problems than nurses (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Nurses who are involved in the care for people with heart disease have a responsibility to assess and dispel people's misconceptions about their condition, and therefore continuing professional education is required to develop this clinical expertise. Future research should focus on methods of dispelling cardiac misconceptions in both nursing and patient education.

Web-based cardiac REhabilitatioN alternative for those declining or dropping out of conventional rehabilitation: results of the WREN feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Introduction: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is typically delivered in hospital-based classes and is recommended to help people reduce their risk of further cardiac events. However, many eligible people are not completing the programme. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of delivering a web-based CR intervention for those who decline/drop out from usual CR. Intervention: A web-based CR programme for 6 months, facilitated with remote support. Methods: Two-centre, randomised controlled feasibility trial. Patients were randomly allocated to web-based CR/usual care for 6 months. Data were collected to inform the design of a larger study: recruitment rates, quality of life (MacNew), exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test) and mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Feasibility of health utility collection was also evaluated. Results: 60 patients were randomised (90% male, mean age 62±9 years, 26% of those eligible). 82% completed all three assessment visits. 78% of the web group completed the programme. Quality of life improved in the web group by a clinically meaningful amount (0.5±1.1 units vs 0.2±0.7 units: control). Exercise capacity improved in both groups but mood did not change in either group. It was feasible to collect health utility data. Conclusions: It was feasible to recruit and retention to the end of the study was good. The web group reported important improvements in quality of life. This intervention has the opportunity to increase access to CR for patients who would otherwise not attend. Promising outcomes and recruitment suggest feasibility for a full-scale trial. Trial registration number: 10726798.

Does cardiac rehabilitation meet minimum standards: an observational study using UK national audit?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent by which programmes meet national minimum standards for the delivery of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) as part of the National Certification Programme for Cardiovascular Rehabilitation (NCP_CR). METHODS: The analysis used UK National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation (NACR) data extracted and validated for the period 2013-2014 set against six NCP_CR measures deemed as important for the delivery of high-quality CR programmes. Each programme that achieved a single minimum standard was given a score of 1. The range of the scoring for meeting the minimum standards is between 1 and 6. The performance of CR programmes was categorised into three groups: high (score of 5-6), middle (scores of 3-4) and low (scores of 1-2). If a programme did not meet any of the six criteria, they were considered to have failed. RESULTS: Data from 170 CR programmes revealed statistically significant differences among UK CR programmes. The principal findings were that, based on NCP_CR criteria, 30.6% were assessed as high performance with 45.9% as mid-level performance programmes, 18.2% were in the lower-level and 5.3% failed to meet any of the minimum criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that high levels of performance is achievable in the era of modern cardiology and that many CR programmes are close to meeting high performance standards. However, substantial variation, below the recommended minimum standards, exists throughout the UK. National certification should be seen as a positive step to ensure that patients, irrespective of where they live, are accessing quality services.

Technology-Enabled Remote Monitoring and Self-Management - Vision for Patient Empowerment Following Cardiac and Vascular Surgery: User Testing and Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Tens of thousands of cardiac and vascular surgeries (CaVS) are performed on seniors in Canada and the United Kingdom each year to improve survival, relieve disease symptoms, and improve health-related quality of life (HRQL). However, chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), undetected or delayed detection of hemodynamic compromise, complications, and related poor functional status are major problems for substantial numbers of patients during the recovery process. To tackle this problem, we aim to refine and test the effectiveness of an eHealth-enabled service delivery intervention, TecHnology-Enabled remote monitoring and Self-MAnagemenT-VIsion for patient EmpoWerment following Cardiac and VasculaR surgery (THE SMArTVIEW, CoVeRed), which combines remote monitoring, education, and self-management training to optimize recovery outcomes and experience of seniors undergoing CaVS in Canada and the United Kingdom. OBJECTIVE: Our objectives are to (1) refine SMArTVIEW via high-fidelity user testing and (2) examine the effectiveness of SMArTVIEW via a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: CaVS patients and clinicians will engage in two cycles of focus groups and usability testing at each site; feedback will be elicited about expectations and experience of SMArTVIEW, in context. The data will be used to refine the SMArTVIEW eHealth delivery program. Upon transfer to the surgical ward (ie, post-intensive care unit [ICU]), 256 CaVS patients will be reassessed postoperatively and randomly allocated via an interactive Web randomization system to the intervention group or usual care. The SMArTVIEW intervention will run from surgical ward day 2 until 8 weeks following surgery. Outcome assessments will occur on postoperative day 30; at week 8; and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The primary outcome is worst postop pain intensity upon movement in the previous 24 hours (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form), averaged across the previous 14 days. Secondary outcomes include a composite of postoperative complications related to hemodynamic compromise-death, myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke- all-cause mortality and surgical site infections, functional status (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-12), depressive symptoms (Geriatric Depression Scale), health service utilization-related costs (health service utilization data from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences data repository), and patient-level cost of recovery (Ambulatory Home Care Record). A linear mixed model will be used to assess the effects of the intervention on the primary outcome, with an a priori contrast of weekly average worst pain intensity upon movement to evaluate the primary endpoint of pain at 8 weeks postoperation. We will also examine the incremental cost of the intervention compared to usual care using a regression model to estimate the difference in expected health care costs between groups. RESULTS: Study start-up is underway and usability testing is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Given our experience, dedicated industry partners, and related RCT infrastructure, we are confident we can make a lasting contribution to improving the care of seniors who undergo CaVS.

Quality-of-life measurement in chronic heart failure: do we take account of the patient perspective?

The modern management of chronic heart failure has led to improved life expectancy, functioning and health-related quality of life (HRQL). HRQL measures the effects of an illness or a treatment from the patient's perspective. It is now recognised that the patient's perspective is as legitimate and valid as the clinician's in monitoring health care outcomes. Although there are a number of quality-of-life measures, which can be separated into two types-generic and disease specific-many have been developed, with little or no account being taken of the patient's perspective. Because most of the widely used measures are not patient centred, they may lack sensitivity and specificity in determining those aspects of HRQL important to individual patients. This paper reviews the use of quality-of-life assessment tools in the evaluation of patients with heart failure.

Does it matter what patients think? The relationship between changes in patients' beliefs about angina and their psychological and functional status.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine the association between changes in misconceived or maladaptive beliefs about angina and patients' functional and psychological status. METHOD: The method used was a prospective follow-up study over 1 year of 133 people with angina. RESULTS: Beliefs about angina were significantly associated with functional and psychological status. People with more misconceived or maladaptive beliefs were more anxious and physically limited than were people with fewer such beliefs, with differences in physical functioning that were clinically significant. Change in angina beliefs over 1 year was the most significant predictor for physical functioning at follow-up, after controlling for the effects of demographic variables and the outcome variable at baseline, whereas change in the frequency of angina did not contribute significantly to this model. CONCLUSION: Misconceived and maladaptive beliefs about angina are associated with reductions in both functional and psychological status. These beliefs are easily and quickly identified using a simple questionnaire and should be corrected.

A comparison of the illness beliefs of people with angina and their peers: a questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: What people believe about their illness may affect how they cope with it. It has been suggested that such beliefs stem from those commonly held within society. This study compared the beliefs held by people with angina, regarding causation and coping in angina, with the beliefs of their friends who do not suffer from angina. METHODS: Postal survey using the York Angina Beliefs Questionnaire (version 1), which elicits stress attributions and misconceived beliefs about causation and coping. This was administered to 164 people with angina and their non-cohabiting friends matched for age and sex. 132 people with angina and 94 friends completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: Peers are more likely than people with angina to believe that angina is caused by a worn out heart (p < 0.01), angina is a small heart attack (p = 0.02), and that it causes permanent damage to the heart (p < 0.001). Peers were also more likely to believe that people with angina should take life easy (p < 0.01) and avoid exercise (p = 0.04) and excitement (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The beliefs of the peer group about causation and coping in angina run counter to professional advice. Over time this may contribute to a reduction in patient concordance with risk factor reduction, and may help to create cardiac invalids.

Development of the York Angina Beliefs Questionnaire.

It is known that people who have suffered a heart attack can hold misconceived or maladaptive beliefs and that these can have a deleterious effect on quality of life and functioning. It has also been noted that clinicians do not routinely elicit these maladaptive beliefs. It is probable that angina sufferers also hold such beliefs. As angina is a great burden in the western world, with over two million people with angina in the UK alone, there may be large numbers of people who suffer from these frightening and unhelpful misconceptions. We believe that there is a need for a simple questionnaire that could assist the delivery of tailored education directed at dispelling common misconceptions. This article details the development and psychometric properties of just such a brief questionnaire, designed for use both in research and in clinical practice.