Cardiac Rehabilitation in Frail Older Adults With Cardiovascular Disease: A NEW DIAGNOSTIC AND TREATMENT PARADIGM.

Older adults with cardiovascular disease (CVD) pose challenges to cardiac rehabilitation (CR) clinicians because their disease is often coupled to physical frailty. Older patients with CVD and frailty may be less likely to tolerate conventional CR exercise training due to multidimensional (ie, strength, mobility, and balance) physical impairments. Furthermore, conventional CR typically emphasizes endurance training without addressing the intrinsic skeletal muscle impairments of frail patients that often manifest as deficits in strength, mobility, and balance, undercutting feasibility and any likely benefits. However, if appropriately modified to meet the needs of frail older adults, CR may be a powerful tool for this challenging population. To best serve frail, older adults with CVD, CR programs can incorporate well-validated strategies to assess frailty and physical function that also fit within the workflows and patient populations of individual programs. Such frailty assessments provide opportunities to identify specific targets (eg, weakness) that need to be addressed before a subsequent aerobic training program can be successfully implemented and sustained. The current review focuses on the use of physical frailty measures in older adults with CVD, with practical considerations for their clinical use in contemporary CR, as well as directions for future research.

Perspectives on Implementing a Multidomain Approach to Caring for Older Adults With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The American College of Cardiology (ACC) Geriatric Cardiology Section Leadership Council recently outlined 4 key domains (which are composed of 14 subdomains) that are important to assess in older adults with heart failure (HF). We sought to determine which geriatric domains/subdomains are routinely assessed, how they are assessed, and how they impact clinical management in the care of ambulatory older adults with HF. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: Ambulatory. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen active ACC member physicians from the geriatric cardiology community. MEASUREMENTS: Electronic survey assessing which domains/subdomains are currently assessed in these selected real-world practices, how they are assessed, and how they are incorporated into clinical management. RESULTS: Of 15 clinicians, 14 responded to the survey. The majority routinely assess 3 to 4 domains (median, 3; interquartile range, 3-4) and a range of 4 to 12 subdomains (median, 8; interquartile range, 6-11). All respondents routinely assess the medical and physical function domains, 71% routinely assess the mind/emotion domain, and 50% routinely assess the social domain. The most common subdomains included comorbidity burden (100%), polypharmacy (100%), basic function (93%), mobility (86%), falls risk (71%), frailty (64%), and cognition (57%). Sensory impairment (50%), social isolation (50%), nutritional status (43%), loneliness (7%), and financial means (7%) were least frequently assessed. There was significant heterogeneity with regard to the tools used to assess subdomains. Common themes for how the subdomains influenced clinical care included informing prognosis, informing risk-benefit of pharmacologic therapy and invasive procedures, and consideration for palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: While respondents routinely assess multiple domains and subdomains and view these as important to clinical care, there is substantial heterogeneity regarding which subdomains are assessed and the tools used to assess them. These observations provide a foundation that inform a research agenda with regard to providing holistic and patient-centered care to older adults with HF. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2593-2599, 2019.

Does heart failure-specific health status identify patients with bothersome symptoms, depression, anxiety, and/or poorer spiritual well-being?

AIMS: Patients with heart failure often have under-recognized symptoms, depression, anxiety, and poorer spiritual well-being ('QoL domains'). Ideally all patients should have heart failure-specific health status and quality of life (QoL) domains routinely evaluated; however, lack of time and resources are limiting in most clinical settings. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether heart failure-specific health status was associated with QoL domains and to identify a score warranting further evaluation of QoL domain deficits. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants (N = 314) enrolled in the Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness trial completed measures of heart failure-specific health status [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, KCCQ (score 0-100, 0 = worst health status)], additional symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), and spiritual well-being (Facit-Sp) at baseline. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) KCCQ score was 46.9 ± 19.3, mean age was 65.5 ± 11.4, and 79% were male. Prevalence of QoL domain deficits ranged from 11% (nausea) to 47% (depression). Sensitivity/specificity of KCCQ for each QoL domain ranged from 20-40%/80-96% for KCCQ ≤ 25, 61-84%/48-62% for KCCQ ≤ 50, 84-97%/26-40% for KCCQ ≤ 60, and 96-100%/8-13% for KCCQ ≤ 75. Patients with KCCQ ≤ 60 had mean ± SD 4.5 ± 2.5 QoL domain deficits (maximum 12), vs. 1.6 ± 1.6 for KCCQ > 60 (P < 0.001). Similar results were seen for KCCQ ≤25 (6.6 ± 2.4 vs. 3.3 ± 2.4), KCCQ ≤ 50 (4.8 ± 2.6 vs. 2.5 ± 2) and KCCQ ≤ 75 (4.0 ± 2.6 vs. 1.0 ± 1.2) (all P < 00001). CONCLUSION: KCCQ ≤ 60 had good sensitivity for each QoL domain deficit and for patients with at least one QoL domain deficit. Screening for QoL domain deficits should target patients with lower KCCQ scores based on a clinic's KCCQ score distribution and clinical resources for addressing QoL domain deficits.