Clinician challenges to evidence-based prescribing for heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Reasons for suboptimal prescribing for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have been identified, but it is unclear if they remain relevant with recent advances in healthcare delivery and technologies. This study aimed to identify and understand current clinician-perceived challenges to prescribing guideline-directed HFrEF medications. METHODS: We conducted content analysis methodology, including interviews and member-checking focus groups with primary care and cardiology clinicians. Interview guides were informed by the Cabana Framework. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 33 clinicians (13 cardiology specialists, 22 physicians) and member checking with 10 of these. We identified four levels of challenges from the clinician perspective. Clinician level challenges included misconceptions about guideline recommendations, clinician assumptions (e.g., drug cost or affordability), and clinical inertia. Patient-clinician level challenges included misalignment of priorities and insufficient communication. Clinician-clinician level challenges were primarily between generalists and specialists, including lack of role clarity, competing priorities of providing focused versus holistic care, and contrasting confidence regarding safety of newer drugs. Policy and system/organisation level challenges included insufficient access to timely/reliable patient data, and unintended care gaps for medications without financially incentivized metrics. CONCLUSION: This study presents current challenges faced by cardiology and primary care which can be used to strategically design interventions to improve guideline-directed care for HFrEF. The findings support the persistence of many challenges and also sheds light on new challenges. New challenges identified include conflicting perspectives between generalists and specialists, hesitancy to prescribe newer medications due to safety concerns, and unintended consequences related to value-based reimbursement metrics for select medications.

Applying terror management theory to patients with life-threatening illness: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Terror management theory (TMT) posits that people manage death-related anxiety through the meaning provided by their cultural world-views and the sense of personal value provided by self-esteem. While a large body of research has supported the core propositions of TMT, little research has focused on its application to individuals with terminal illness. If TMT can help healthcare providers better understand how belief systems adapt and change in life-threatening illness, and the role they play in managing death-related anxiety, it may provide guidance on how to improve communication around treatments near the end of life. As such, we set out to review the available research articles that focus on describing the relationship between TMT and life-threatening illness. METHODS: We reviewed PubMed, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and EMBASE through May 2022 for original research articles focused on TMT and life-threatening illness. Articles were only deemed appropriate for inclusion if direct incorporation of the principles of TMT were made in reference to a population of interest whom had life-threatening illness Results were screened by title and abstract, followed by full review of candidate articles. References were also scanned. Articles were assessed qualitatively. RESULTS: Six relevant and original research articles were published which provide varied levels of support for TMT's application in critical illness, each article detailed evidence of ideological changes consistent with what TMT would predict. Building self-esteem, enhancing the experience of life as meaningful, incorporating spirituality, engaging family members, and caring for patients at home where meaning and self-esteem can be better maintained are strategies supported by the studies and serve as starting points for further research. CONCLUSION: These articles suggest that applying TMT to life-threatening illness can help identify psychological changes that may effectively minimize the distress from dying. Limitations of this study include a heterogenous group of relevant studies and qualitative assessment.

Comparative effectiveness of generic commercial versus locally customized clinical decision support tools to reduce prescription of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for patients with heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of 2 clinical decision support (CDS) tools to avoid prescription of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with heart failure (HF): a "commercial" and a locally "customized" alert. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 2 CDS tools implemented within a large integrated health system. The commercial CDS tool was designed according to third-party drug content and EHR vendor specifications. The customized CDS tool underwent a user-centered design process informed by implementation science principles, with input from a cross disciplinary team. The customized CDS tool replaced the commercial CDS tool. Data were collected from the electronic health record via analytic reports and manual chart review. The primary outcome was effectiveness, defined as whether the clinician changed their behavior and did not prescribe an NSAID. RESULTS: A random sample of 366 alerts (183 per CDS tool) was evaluated that represented 355 unique patients. The commercial CDS tool was effective for 7 of 172 (4%) patients, while the customized CDS tool was effective for 81 of 183 (44%) patients. After adjusting for age, chronic kidney disease, ejection fraction, NYHA class, concurrent prescription of an opioid or acetaminophen, visit type (inpatient or outpatient), and clinician specialty, the customized alerts were at 24.3 times greater odds of effectiveness compared to the commercial alerts (OR: 24.3 CI: 10.20-58.06). CONCLUSION: Investing additional resources to customize a CDS tool resulted in a CDS tool that was more effective at reducing the total number of NSAID orders placed for patients with HF compared to a commercially available CDS tool.

Shared Decision Making in Cardiac Electrophysiology Procedures and Arrhythmia Management.

Shared decision making (SDM) has been advocated to improve patient care, patient decision acceptance, patient-provider communication, patient motivation, adherence, and patient reported outcomes. Documentation of SDM is endorsed in several society guidelines and is a condition of reimbursement for selected cardiovascular and cardiac arrhythmia procedures. However, many clinicians argue that SDM already occurs with clinical encounter discussions or the process of obtaining informed consent and note the additional imposed workload of using and documenting decision aids without validated tools or evidence that they improve clinical outcomes. In reality, SDM is a process and can be done without decision tools, although the process may be variable. Also, SDM advocates counter that the low-risk process of SDM need not be held to the high bar of demonstrating clinical benefit and that increasing the quality of decision making should be sufficient. Our review leverages a multidisciplinary group of experts in cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, epidemiology, and SDM, as well as a patient advocate. Our goal is to examine and assess SDM methodology, tools, and available evidence on outcomes in patients with heart rhythm disorders to help determine the value of SDM, assess its possible impact on electrophysiological procedures and cardiac arrhythmia management, better inform regulatory requirements, and identify gaps in knowledge and future needs.

Acute Myocardial Infarction Cohorts Defined by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Versus Diagnosis-Related Groups: Analysis of Diagnostic Agreement and Quality Measures in an Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Among Medicare value-based payment programs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program uses International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes to identify the program denominator, while the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced program uses diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). The extent to which these programs target similar patients, whether they target the intended population (type 1 myocardial infarction), and whether outcomes are comparable between cohorts is not known. METHODS: In a retrospective study of 2176 patients hospitalized in an integrated health system, a cohort of patients assigned a principal ICD-10 diagnosis of AMI and a cohort of patients assigned an AMI DRG were compared according to patient-level agreement and outcomes such as mortality and readmission. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred thirty-five patients were included in the ICD-10 cohort compared with 662 patients in the DRG cohort. Only 421 patients were included in both AMI cohorts (19.3% agreement). DRG cohort patients were older (70 versus 65 years, P<0.001), more often female (48% versus 30%, P<0.001), and had higher rates of heart failure (52% versus 33%, P<0.001) and kidney disease (42% versus 25%, P<0.001). Comparing outcomes, the DRG cohort had significantly higher unadjusted rates of 30-day mortality (6.6% versus 2.5%, P<0.001), 1-year mortality (21% versus 8%, P<0.001), and 90-day readmission (26% versus 19%, P=0.006) than the ICD-10 cohort. Two observations help explain these differences: 61% of ICD-10 cohort patients were assigned procedural DRGs for revascularization instead of an AMI DRG, and type 1 myocardial infarction patients made up a smaller proportion of the DRG cohort (34%) than the ICD-10 cohort (78%). CONCLUSIONS: The method used to identify denominators for value-based payment programs has important implications for the patient characteristics and outcomes of the populations. As national and local quality initiatives mature, an emphasis on ICD-10 codes to define AMI cohorts would better represent type 1 myocardial infarction patients.

Medical Marijuana, Recreational Cannabis, and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cannabis, or marijuana, has potential therapeutic and medicinal properties related to multiple compounds, particularly Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Over the past 25 years, attitudes toward cannabis have evolved rapidly, with expanding legalization of medical and recreational use at the state level in the United States and recreational use nationally in Canada and Uruguay. As a result, the consumption of cannabis products is increasing considerably, particularly among youth. Our understanding of the safety and efficacy of cannabis has been limited by decades of worldwide illegality and continues to be limited in the United States by the ongoing classification of cannabis as a Schedule 1 controlled substance. These shifts in cannabis use require clinicians to understand conflicting laws, health implications, and therapeutic possibilities. Cannabis may have therapeutic benefits, but few are cardiovascular in nature. Conversely, many of the concerning health implications of cannabis include cardiovascular diseases, although they may be mediated by mechanisms of delivery. This statement critically reviews the use of medicinal and recreational cannabis from a clinical but also a policy and public health perspective by evaluating its safety and efficacy profile, particularly in relationship to cardiovascular health.

Denver Spirited Heart: Mixed-Methods Pilot Study of a Psychospiritual Intervention for Heart Failure Patients.

BACKGROUND: Increased spiritual well-being is related to quality of life (QOL) in patients with heart failure (HF). However, consistent and deliberate integration of spirituality into HF patient care has received limited attention. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary evidence regarding the efficacy of a resource-sparing psychospiritual intervention to improve QOL in HF patients. METHODS: A 12-week mail-based intervention addressing spirituality, stress, coping, and adjusting to illness was developed and tested using a mixed-methods, 1-group pretest-posttest pilot study design. A convenience sample of patients with HF completed prestudy and poststudy questionnaires, including the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, Patient Health Questionnaire, Meaning in Life Questionnaire, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual. Research staff conducted semistructured interviews with program completers. Interviews were coded and analyzed using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Participants (N = 33; 82% male; mean age, 61 years) completed 87% of baseline data collection, an average of 9 intervention modules, and 55% of poststudy questionnaires. Participants rated all the modules as at least moderately helpful, and qualitative themes suggested that patients found the intervention acceptable and beneficial. Most participants believed spirituality should continue to be included, although they disagreed on the extent to which religion should remain. Participants who completed the intervention reported evidence suggesting increased QOL (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; effect size [ES], 0.53), decreased depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; ES, 0.62), and less searching for meaning (Meaning in Life Questionnaire; ES, 0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that a module-based program integrating spirituality and psychosocial coping strategies was feasible and acceptable and may improve QOL. This preliminary study suggests that clinicians be open to issues of spirituality as they may relate to QOL in patients with HF. Future research will test a revised intervention.

Use of Risk Models to Predict Death in the Next Year Among Individual Ambulatory Patients With Heart Failure.

Importance: The clinical practice guidelines for heart failure recommend the use of validated risk models to estimate prognosis. Understanding how well models identify individuals who will die in the next year informs decision making for advanced treatments and hospice. Objective: To quantify how risk models calculated in routine practice estimate more than 50% 1-year mortality among ambulatory patients with heart failure who die in the subsequent year. Design, Setting, and Participants: Ambulatory adults with heart failure from 3 integrated health systems were enrolled between 2005 and 2008. The probability of death was estimated using the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) and the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) risk calculator. Baseline covariates were collected from electronic health records. Missing covariates were imputed. Estimated mortality was compared with actual mortality at both population and individual levels. Main Outcomes and Measures: One-year mortality. Results: Among 10 930 patients with heart failure, the median age was 77 years, and 48.0% of these patients were female. In the year after study enrollment, 1661 patients died (15.9% by life-table analysis). At the population level, 1-year predicted mortality among the cohort was 9.7% for the SHFM (C statistic of 0.66) and 17.5% for the MAGGIC risk calculator (C statistic of 0.69). At the individual level, the SHFM predicted a more than 50% probability of dying in the next year for 8 of the 1661 patients who died (sensitivity for 1-year death was 0.5%) and for 5 patients who lived at least a year (positive predictive value, 61.5%). The MAGGIC risk calculator predicted a more than 50% probability of dying in the next year for 52 of the 1661 patients who died (sensitivity, 3.1%) and for 63 patients who lived at least a year (positive predictive value, 45.2%). Conversely, the SHFM estimated that 8496 patients (77.8%) had a less than 15% probability of dying at 1 year, yet this lower-risk end of the score range captured nearly two-thirds of deaths (n = 997); similarly, the MAGGIC risk calculator estimated a probability of dying of less than 25% for the majority of patients who died at 1 year (n = 914). Conclusions and Relevance: Although heart failure risk models perform reasonably well at the population level, they do not reliably predict which individual patients will die in the next year.

Risk factors for adverse outcomes by left ventricular ejection fraction in a contemporary heart failure population.

BACKGROUND: Although heart failure (HF) is a syndrome with important differences in response to therapy by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), existing risk stratification models typically group all HF patients together. The relative importance of common predictor variables for important clinical outcomes across strata of LVEF is relatively unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified all members with HF between 2005 and 2008 from 4 integrated healthcare systems in the Cardiovascular Research Network. LVEF was categorized as preserved (LVEF ≥ 50% or normal), borderline (41%-49% or mildly reduced), and reduced (≤ 40% or moderately to severely reduced). We used Cox regression models to identify independent predictors of death and hospitalization by LVEF category. Among 30094 ambulatory adults with HF, mean age was 74 years and 46% were women. LVEF was preserved in 49.5%, borderline in 16.2%, and reduced in 34.3% of patients. During a median follow-up of 1.8 years (interquartile range, 0.8-3.1), 8060 (26.8%) patients died, 8108 (26.9%) were hospitalized for HF, and 20272 (67.4%) were hospitalized for any reason. In multivariable models, nearly all tested covariates performed similarly across LVEF strata for the outcome of death from any cause, as well as for HF-related and all-cause hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: We found that in a large, diverse contemporary HF population, risk assessment was strikingly similar across all LVEF categories. These data suggest that, although many HF therapies are uniquely applied to patients with reduced LVEF, individual prognostic factor performance does not seem to be significantly related to level of left ventricular systolic function.

Patient-identified factors related to heart failure readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Although readmission after hospitalization for heart failure has received increasing attention, little is known about its root causes. Prior investigations have relied on administrative databases, chart review, and single-question surveys. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed semistructured 30- to 60-minute interviews of patients (n=28) readmitted within 6 months of index heart failure admission. Established qualitative approaches were used to analyze and to interpret data. Interview findings were the primary focus of the study, but patient information and provider comments from chart data were also consulted. Patient median age was 61 years; 29% were nonwhite; 50% were married; 32% had preserved ejection fraction; and median time from discharge to readmission was 31 days. Reasons for readmission were multifactorial and not easily categorized into mutually exclusive reasons. Five themes emerged as reasons cited for hospital readmission: distressing symptoms, unavoidable progression of illness, influence of psychosocial factors, good but imperfect self-care adherence, and health system failures. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides the first systematic qualitative assessment of patient perspectives concerning heart failure readmission. Contrary to prior literature and distinct from what we found documented in the medical record, patient experiences were highly heterogeneous, not easily categorized as preventable or not preventable, and not easily attributed to a single cause. These findings suggest that future interventions designed to reduce heart failure readmissions should be multifaceted, should be systemic in nature, and should integrate patient input.

Palliative care and hospice in advanced heart failure.

Advanced heart failure (HF) is a disease process that carries a high burden of symptoms, suffering, and death. Palliative care can complement traditional care to improve symptom amelioration, patient-caregiver communication, emotional support, and medical decision making. Despite a growing body of evidence supporting the integration of palliative care into the overall care of patients with HF and some recent evidence of increased use, palliative therapies remain underused in the treatment of advanced HF. Review of the literature reveals that although barriers to integrating palliative care are not fully understood, difficult prognostication combined with caregiver inexperience with end-of-life issues specific to advanced HF is likely to contribute. In this review, we have outlined the general need for palliative care in advanced HF, detailed how palliative measures can be integrated into the care of those having this disease, and explored end-of-life issues specific to these patients.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in patients with a left ventricular assist device.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) use is becoming increasingly common for patients with end-stage heart failure. However, the rate of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks and the effect of these shocks on outcomes in patients with LVADs remain unknown. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed from patients with both an ICD and a LVAD from September 2000 to February 2009. The association between ICD shocks and survival while receiving device support was assessed using Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Thirty-three of 61 patients with a LVAD also had an ICD and form the basis of this report. The mean duration of LVAD support was 238 days. One or more ICD shocks were delivered to 14 patients (42%) with 8 (24%) receiving appropriate shocks for ventricular arrhythmias and 6 (18%) receiving inappropriate shocks. No patients received both appropriate and inappropriate shocks. When compared with receiving no ICD shock, receiving any ICD shock or an appropriate ICD shock were both associated with an increase in the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 17.3, p = 0.027, and HR 5.3, 95% CI 1.3 to 22.6, p = 0.023, respectively); receipt of an inappropriate shock showed a non-significant trend for an increased risk of death (HR 3.2, 95% CI 0.7 to 16.1, p = 0.151). CONCLUSIONS: ICD shocks are common after implantation of LVADs, with nearly equal numbers of appropriate and inappropriate shocks. ICD shocks are associated with higher mortality. Larger studies are needed for assessing the independent relationship of ICDs to a variety of clinical outcomes in patients with LVADs.