RESUMO
Background: Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) frequently suffer from depressive comorbidity. CHF and depressive comorbidity can cause somatic symptoms. The correct attribution of somatic symptoms is important. Thus, we aimed to assess potential differences in somatic symptom severity between CHF patients with and without depressive comorbidity. Methods: We evaluated depressive comorbidity using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), somatic symptom severity with the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), and sociodemographic and medical variables in 308 CHF outpatients. To compare somatic symptom severity between CHF patients with and without depressive comorbidity, we conducted item-level analyses of covariance. Results: Of the 308 participating patients, 93 (30.3%) met the PHQ-9 criteria for depressive comorbidity. These patients did not differ from those without depressive comorbidity with regard to age, sex, left ventricular function, and multimorbidity. Patients with depressive comorbidity scored significantly higher on ten out of thirteen PHQ-15 items than patients without depressive comorbidity. The largest effect sizes (0.71-0.80) were shown for symptoms of headache, chest pain, shortness of breath, and palpitations, and the latter three were potentially attributable to heart failure. Conclusions: Among patients with CHF, somatic symptoms are more pronounced in those with depressive comorbidity than those without depressive comorbidity. This finding is especially true for cardiac symptoms independent of CHF severity. The potential interpretation of somatic symptoms as correlates of depressive comorbidity must be recognized in clinical practice.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Community-based interventions may promote awareness and adherence to atrial fibrillation (AF)-related therapies, potentially reducing adverse events. The ARENA project investigated the health status, therapies and events in AF patients in the Rhein-Neckar Region, Germany. The subproject "ARENA intervention" studied the effect of community-based interventions on AF-associated outcomes. METHODS: From 2016 onward, patients with diagnosed AF were recruited for the observational ARENA registry. In 2018, an intervention period was initiated involving population-based information campaigns on AF diagnosis and therapies. The "control group" was recruited prior to initiation, and the "intervention group" afterward. Patients underwent standardized follow-up > 1 year after recruitment. Clinical outcomes, therapy and quality of life were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 2769 patients were included. This real-world cohort showed high adherence to oral anticoagulation therapy (OAC) and an increased use of NOACs over vitamin K antagonists over time. In the intervention group (n = 1362), more patients continued OAC at follow-up (87.1% vs. 81.5%, P = 0.002). However, this difference was not significant in the patient subgroup with class I/IIa indications for OAC (90.1% vs. 87.5%, P = 0.11). AF-related re-hospitalization was lower in the intervention group (6.8% vs. 12.3%, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in quality of life. AF-related anxiety was reduced at follow-up. Of note, nearly a quarter of all patients stated that ARENA had influenced their health perception. CONCLUSION: Tailored community-based campaigns may raise awareness for AF-related health issues, supporting therapy adherence. Future public strategies to improve quality of life in AF patients should be investigated, as the ARENA project hints at a potential benefit of population-based campaigns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02978248).