The psychological consequences of living with coronary heart disease: Are patients' psychological needs served? A mixed-method study in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: This mixed-method study explores psychological needs, access and barriers in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients with and without mental health issues (MHI) within the German healthcare system. METHODS: This study was conducted in three different healthcare settings: two hospitals, two rehabilitation clinics and three cardiology practices in Cologne, Germany. Patients were screened for angiographically documented CHD and other inclusion criteria. In total, 364 CHD patients took part in this study. It consisted of two parts: In the first part, participants filled in a newly developed questionnaire about their psychological needs, access and barriers within the healthcare system and their contact with their doctor in these matters. Then, patients were screened for MHIs with the help of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). When a score above seven was scored on the HADS, patients were additionally screened for specific MHIs using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders. In the second part, 20 participants were subsequently interviewed in a semi-structured interview to generate more in-depth findings. RESULTS: The interviews show that CHD patients with and without MHI experienced a cardiac event as life-changing and had an urgent need to talk about CHD with their doctor, mostly the general practitioner (GP). When the GP spoke to the patient shortly after the cardiac event, patients experienced relief and were better able to cope with their illness. Only 9.1% reported being aided in their search for psychotherapeutic treatment or drug treatment (4.1%). CONCLUSION: The needs of CHD patients with and without MHI were not adequately satisfied within our sample. Psychological measures are necessary for sufficient improvement, such as training of doctors in doctor-patient communication (e.g., better support in coping with MHI/CHD), improvements in the procedure (more time for conversations during doctor contacts), and improvement of structural requirements (referring patients faster to psychotherapists). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We received input from patients during pretests and used the feedback to tailor our questionnaire and the interview guidelines. Afterwards, we disseminated the main results for the patient and public involvement (e.g., public lectures, leaflets for self-help groups, etc.).

Com-On Questionnaire: Development and validation of a questionnaire for evaluating communication skills of oncologists.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to develop and validate an instrument for assessing the communication skills of oncology physicians from a patient's point of view. METHODS: A first draft of the questionnaire was compiled based on skills reflecting good physician-patient communication identified in the literature. The questionnaire was critically revised by experts to ensure the validity of its contents. The revised questionnaire was completed by a sample of 153 cancer patients. The questionnaire was developed in German and later translated into English. RESULTS: After analysis using classical test theory and an exploratory factor analysis, four different factors could be extracted. These factors were labelled setting, patient-centeredness, empathy and consulting competencies. Unsuitable items were eliminated within the analysis. All remaining items hold an appropriate degree of selectivity, item difficulty and reliability/consistency. CONCLUSION: A novel questionnaire for evaluating communication skills of physicians was developed. It contains 36 items and is named 'Com-On Questionnaire: Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Physician's Communication Skills in Oncology'. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The questionnaire is suitable for measuring both the strengths and deficits within the physician-patient communication in oncology from the patients' perspective.

Quality of health care for patients with coronary heart disease and comorbid mental disorders: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is often associated with mental disorders (MDs). Comorbid MDs reduce the quality of life and increase cardiac morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, there is little and inconsistent research on the management of MDs in CHD patients. To bridge this gap, this study aims to gain insight into the long-term course of MD-related health care for patients with CHD, in order to identify opportunities for care improvement. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we investigated whether CHD patients with or without expert-rated MD at baseline (N = 364) received different MD-related health care from either their general practitioner (GP) or cardiologist at follow-up, M = 2.7 [2.0-4.0] years later. In the follow-up assessment, N = 131 CHD patients participated and received questionnaires capturing sociodemographic, mental health, and MD-related health care characteristics. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and chi-squared tests were used for analyses. RESULTS: We found significant differences in MD-related health care. CHD patients with MD were more likely to be examined psychologically/psychiatrically (MD 55.9%, non-MD 16.7%, p = < .001) and diagnosed with MD (MD 55.9%, non-MD 13.5%, p = .020) by their GP or cardiologist. Recommendations for and responses to requests for psychotherapy were more likely in MD patients compared to non-MD patients (MD 38.7%, non-MD 11.8%, p = .012 and MD 38.5%, non-MD 11.8%, p = .031, respectively). No significant differences were found concerning physicians' active demand for patients' mental health, referral to a specialist for additional diagnostics, provision of information about the diagnosed MD and further treatment options, response to the patients' request for psychopharmacotherapy, help received in finding psychotherapy or psychopharmacotherapy, and actual receipt of these treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate differences in MD-related health care of CHD patients with and without comorbid MD. However, they still highlight the need to further encourage primary care physicians treating CHD to adequately address MDs, provide further diagnostics, support, and information to affected patients. To address this, physicians may benefit from awareness training on the association between CHD and MDs and on appropriate communication with MD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German clinical trials register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS) Registration Number: ID DRKS00022154, date of registration: 02.11.2021.

Effects of a Primary Care-Based Intervention on the Identification and Management of Patients with Coronary Heart Disease and Mental or Cognitive Comorbidity-A Study Protocol.

Mental and cognitive disorders (MCD) negatively affect the incidence and prognosis of coronary heart disease (CHD). Medical guidelines recommend the appropriate management of comorbid MCD in patients with CHD, yet there is evidence that the implementation in primary care is not always adequate. We present the protocol for a pilot study that aims to develop a minimally invasive intervention and evaluate its feasibility in the primary care setting to improve the identification and management of comorbid MCD in patients with CHD. The study consists of two consecutive parts and will be carried out in Cologne, Germany. Part 1 comprises the development and tailoring of the intervention, which is guided by qualitative interviews with primary care physicians (PCPs, n = 10), patients with CHD and MCD and patient representatives (n = 10). Part II focuses on the implementation and evaluation of the intervention in n = 10 PCP offices. Changes in PCP behaviour will be analysed by comparing routine data in the practice management system six months before and six months after study participation. In addition, we will explore the influence of organisational characteristics and perform a socio-economic impact assessment. The outcomes of this mixed-method study will inform the feasibility of a PCP-based intervention to improve quality of care in patients with CHD and comorbid MCD.

Comparison of Patient and Proxy Assessment of Patient-Centeredness in the Care of Coronary Heart Disease: A Cross Sectional Survey Using the PACIC-S11.1.

INTRODUCTION: When making medical care more patient-centered, surveys on patients' and their relatives' experiences can be helpful in identifying opportunities for improvement. In cases where the targeted patients are unable to express their own perspective, for example, due to them being too young or suffering from severe impairments, proxies can serve as substitutes. Proxies are frequently used in care planning and consent. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether patients' assessments of how patient-centered their medical care is are similar to those of their proxies. This study aims to assess the level of consistency between patients' and their proxies' assessments using an adapted version of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) short form questionnaire. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, patients with coronary heart disease were recruited at cardiologists' offices, rehabilitation clinics and hospitals. Participants were surveyed with regard to the perceived level of patient-centeredness during their care using an adapted version of the German PACIC short form (PACIC-S11.1). Correlations in the assessments made by each patient and their respective proxy were analyzed. On the level of the patients group and the relatives group differences between mean ratings for each item were compared using paired t-tests. RESULTS: In total, 74 pairs of patients and proxies submitted the completed questionnaire. On the level of the individual patient/proxy pairs, no correlation, or significant but low correlation, was found between the ratings. On the group level, patients' and their proxies' item ratings were similar in the interpretation of averages, but still demonstrated statistically significant differences. Overall, patients rated their care as more patient-centered than their proxies did. CONCLUSION: The study shows that, on the individual level, proxies' ratings do not necessarily reflect the patients' assessment of PCC. On the group level, the assessments of relatives regarding PCC are similar to those of the patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German clinical trials register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS) Registration Number: DRKS00012434 (URL: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00012434).

Detection and treatment of mental disorders in patients with coronary heart disease (MenDis-CHD): A cross-sectional study.

Mental disorders (MD) are associated with an increased risk of developing coronary heart disease (CHD) and with higher CHD-related morbidity and mortality. There is a strong recommendation to routinely screen CHD patients for MDs, diagnosis, and treatment by recent guidelines. The current study aimed at mapping CHD patients' (1) state of diagnostics and, if necessary, treatment of MDs, (2) trajectories and detection rate in healthcare, and (3) the influence of MDs and its management on quality of life and patient satisfaction. The design was a cross-sectional study in three settings (two hospitals, two rehabilitation clinics, three cardiology practices). CHD patients were screened for MDs with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and, if screened-positive, examined for MDs with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-I). Quality of Life (EQ-5D), Patient Assessment of Care for Chronic Conditions (PACIC), and previous routine diagnostics and treatment for MDs were examined. Descriptive statistics, Chi-squared tests, and ANOVA were used for analyses. Analyses of the data of 364 patients resulted in 33.8% positive HADS-screenings and 28.0% SCID-I diagnoses. The detection rate of correctly pre-diagnosed MDs was 49.0%. Physicians actively approached approximately thirty percent of patients on MDs; however, only 6.6% of patients underwent psychotherapy and 4.1% medication therapy through psychotherapists/psychiatrists. MD patients scored significantly lower on EQ-5D and the PACIC. The state of diagnostic and treatment of comorbid MDs in patients with CHD is insufficient. Patients showed a positive attitude towards addressing MDs and were satisfied with medical treatment, but less with MD-related advice. Physicians in secondary care need more training inadequately addressing mental comorbidity.

Health literacy in persons at risk of and patients with coronary heart disease: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) plays a crucial role in the maintenance and improvement of individual health. Empirical findings highlight the relation between a person's HL-level and clinical outcomes. However, the role of HL in persons at risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) and patients with CHD has not been researched conclusively. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review systematically the current evidence on HL, its dimensions (access to, understanding, appraisal and apply of health-related information), and its important influencing factors, with regard to CHD risk. METHOD: We used a mixed-methods approach. Eligible articles needed to employ a validated tool for HL or mention the concept and at least one of its dimensions. After the screening process, 14 quantitative and 27 qualitative studies were included and referred to one or more dimensions of HL. Six observational studies measured HL with a validated tool. RESULTS: Findings suggest that patients with lower HL feel less capable to perform lifestyle changes, exhibit fewer proactive coping behaviors, are more likely to deny CHD, are generally older, are less often employed, have lower educational levels and lower socioeconomic status, experience faster physical decline, and use the healthcare system less, compared to patients with higher HL. Barriers to HL include inadequate provision of information by health providers, lack of awareness of the risk factors for CHD, perceived impairment of quality of life due to lifestyle changes, and negative experiences with the healthcare system. Facilitators include a good patient-physician relationship based on good communicative competences of health providers. CONCLUSIONS: The concept of HL yields a promising potential to understand the process from obtaining information to actual health behavior change, and the results clearly indicate the need for more systematic research on HL in CHD patients and persons at risk.

Quality of health care with regard to detection and treatment of mental disorders in patients with coronary heart disease (MenDis-CHD): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Mental disorders (MD), such as depression, anxiety, and cognitive impairment, are highly prevalent in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Current guidelines on cardiovascular diseases recommend screening and appropriate treatment of MD; however, the degree of implementation of such recommendations in clinical practice is unknown. This study aims to analyze the quality of health care of patients with CHD and MD. Specifically, we aim to analyze (1) the quality of care, (2) trajectories of care, and (3) barriers regarding the detection and treatment of MD. Moreover, we want to identify potentials of changes in health care delivery towards more patient-centered care. The results of this study shall be the first step towards value-based care of people with CHD and comorbid mental disorders. METHODS: We aim to include the following participants: adult patients with CHD (n = 400), their relatives (n = 350) and physicians (n = 80). A particular focus will be on the vulnerable subgroups of patients with CHD and congestive heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction < 40%) and on the underrepresented group of women with CHD. We will apply a mixed-method approach with a quantitative and a qualitative part. Patient-related outcomes (e.g., health-related quality of life, needs, and preferences regarding health care, reasons for non-detection, and lack of treatment of MD) will be explored in a multi-perspective approach including patients, relatives, and physicians' perspectives. Furthermore, routine data from four statutory health insurance funds (SHI) will be analyzed regarding the frequency and treatment of MD in CHD patients. DISCUSSION: MenDis-CHD will provide important insights into the trajectories of health care, quality of health care, barriers, patient needs and preferences as well as expectations and satisfaction with health care in patients with CHD and MD. Potential implications of MenDis-CHD are to enable health care providers to redesign care pathways concerning the treatment of mental comorbidity in patients with CHD by proposing value-based changes in health care and by understanding the barriers to and facilitators of change towards patient-centered care. TRIALS REGISTRATION: German clinical trials register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS) ieRegistration Number: DRKS00012434, date of registration: May 11th, 2017.