Implementation Science to Achieve Equity in Heart Failure Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Guideline-directed medical therapies and guideline-directed nonpharmacological therapies improve quality of life and survival in patients with heart failure (HF), but eligible patients, particularly women and individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, are often not treated with these therapies. Implementation science uses evidence-based theories and frameworks to identify strategies that facilitate uptake of evidence to improve health. In this scientific statement, we provide an overview of implementation trials in HF, assess their use of conceptual frameworks and health equity principles, and provide pragmatic guidance for equity in HF. Overall, behavioral nudges, multidisciplinary care, and digital health strategies increased uptake of therapies in HF effectively but did not include equity goals. Few HF studies focused on achieving equity in HF by engaging stakeholders, quantifying barriers and facilitators to HF therapies, developing strategies for equity informed by theory or frameworks, evaluating implementation measures for equity, and titrating strategies for equity. Among these HF equity studies, feasibility was established in using various educational strategies to promote organizational change and equitable care. A couple include ongoing randomized controlled pragmatic trials for HF equity. There is great need for additional HF implementation trials designed to promote delivery of equitable guideline-directed therapy.

Integrating Cost into Shared Decision-Making for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (POCKET-COST-HF): A Trial Providing Out-of-Pocket Costs for Heart Failure Medications during Clinical Encounters.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) often entails substantial out-of-pocket costs that can vary appreciably between patients. This has raised concerns regarding financial toxicity, equity, and adherence to medical therapy. In spite of these concerns, cost discussions in the HFrEF population appear to be rare, partly because out-of-pocket costs are generally unavailable during clinical encounters. In this trial, out-of-pocket cost information is given to patients and clinicians during outpatient encounters with the aim to assess the impact of providing this information on medication discussions and decisions. HYPOTHESIS: Cost-informed decision-making will be facilitated by providing access to patient-specific out-of-pocket cost estimates at the time of clinical encounter. DESIGN: Integrating Cost into Shared Decision-Making for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (POCKET-COST-HF) is a multicenter trial based at Emory Healthcare and University of Colorado Health. Adapting an existing patient activation tool from the EPIC-HF trial, patients and clinicians are presented a checklist with medications approved for treatment of HFrEF with or without patient-specific out-of-pocket costs (obtained from a financial navigation firm). Clinical encounters are audio-recorded, and patients are surveyed about their experience. The trial utilizes a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, allowing for each site to enroll control and intervention group patients while minimizing contamination of the control arm. DISCUSSION: This trial will elucidate the potential impact of robust cost disclosure efforts and key information regarding patient and clinician perspectives related to cost and cost communication. It also will reveal important challenges associated with providing out-of-pocket costs for medications during clinical encounters. Acquiring medication costs for this trial requires an involved process and outsourcing of work. In addition, costs may change throughout the year, raising questions regarding what specific information is most valuable. These data will represent an important step towards understanding the role of integrating cost discussions into heart failure care. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04793880.

Development of the AMPDECIDE Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Patients Facing Amputation Secondary to Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia.

INTRODUCTION: We developed a patient decision aid to enhance patient participation in amputation level decision making when there is a choice between a transmetatarsal or transtibial amputation. METHODS: In accordance with International Patient Decision Aid Standards, we developed an amputation level patient decision aid for patients who are being considered for either a transmetatarsal or transtibial amputation, incorporating qualitative literature data, quantitative literature data, qualitative provider and patient interviews, expert panel input and iterative patient feedback. RESULTS: The rapid qualitative literature review and qualitative interviews identified five domains outcome priority domains important to patients facing amputation secondary to chronic limb threatening ischemia: 1) the ability to walk, 2) healing and risk for reamputation, 3) rehabilitation program intensity, 4) ease of prosthetic use, and 5) limb length after amputation. The rapid quantitative review identified only two domains with adequate evidence comparing differences in outcomes between the two amputation levels: mobility and reamputation. Patient, surgeon, rehabilitation and decision aid expert feedback allowed us to integrate critical facets of the decision including addressing the emotional context of loss of limb, fear and anxiety as an obstacle to decision making, shaping the decision in the context of remaining life years, and how to facilitate patient knowledge of value tradeoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Amputation level choice is associated with significant outcome trade-offs. The AMPDECIDE patient decision aid can facilitate acknowledgment of patient fears, enhance knowledge of amputation level outcomes, assist patients in determining their personal outcome priorities, and facilitate shared amputation level decision making.

Facilitating Shared Decision Making Among Black Patients at Risk for Sudden Cardiac Arrest : A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation are multifactorial and are partly explained by higher refusal rates. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a video decision support tool for Black patients eligible for an ICD. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted between September 2016 and April 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02819973). SETTING: Fourteen academic and community-based electrophysiology clinics in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Black adults with heart failure who were eligible for a primary prevention ICD. INTERVENTION: An encounter-based video decision support tool or usual care. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the decision regarding ICD implantation. Additional outcomes included patient knowledge, decisional conflict, ICD implantation within 90 days, the effect of racial concordance on outcomes, and the time patients spent with clinicians. RESULTS: Of the 330 randomly assigned patients, 311 contributed data for the primary outcome. Among those randomly assigned to the video group, assent to ICD implantation was 58.6% compared with 59.4% in the usual care group (difference, -0.8 percentage point [95% CI, -13.2 to 11.1 percentage points]). Compared with usual care, participants in the video group had a higher mean knowledge score (difference, 0.7 [CI, 0.2 to 1.1]) and a similar decisional conflict score (difference, -2.6 [CI, -5.7 to 0.4]). The ICD implantation rate within 90 days was 65.7%, with no differences by intervention. Participants randomly assigned to the video group spent less time with their clinician than those in the usual care group (mean, 22.1 vs. 27.0 minutes; difference, -4.9 minutes [CI, -9.4 to -0.3 minutes]). Racial concordance between video and study participants did not affect study outcomes. LIMITATION: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented a requirement for shared decision making for ICD implantation during the study. CONCLUSION: A video-based decision support tool increased patient knowledge but did not increase assent to ICD implantation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

"When I do have some time, rather than spend it polishing silver, I want to spend it with my grandkids": a qualitative exploration of patient values following left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Values are broadly understood to have implications for how individuals make decisions and cope with serious illness stressors, yet it remains uncertain how patients and their family and friend caregivers discuss, reflect upon, and act on their values in the post-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation context. This study aimed to explore the values elicitation experiences of patients with an LVAD in the post-implantation period. METHODS: Qualitative descriptive study of LVAD recipients. Socio-demographics and patient resource use were analyzed using descriptive statistics and semi-structured interview data using thematic analysis. Adult (> 18 years) patients with an LVAD receiving care at an outpatient clinic in the Southeastern United States. RESULTS: Interviewed patients (n = 27) were 30-76 years, 59% male, 67% non-Hispanic Black, 70% married/living with a partner, and 70% urban-dwelling. Three broad themes of patient values elicitation experiences emerged: 1) LVAD implantation prompts deep reflection about life and what is important, 2) patient values are communicated in various circumstances to convey personal goals and priorities to caregivers and clinicians, and 3) patients leverage their values for strength and guidance in navigating life post-LVAD implantation. LVAD implantation was an impactful experience often leading to reevaluation of patients' values; these values became instrumental to making health decisions and coping with stressors during the post-LVAD implantation period. Patient values arose within broad, informal exchanges and focused, decision-making conversations with their caregiver and the healthcare team. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should consider assessing the values of patients post-implantation to facilitate shared understanding of their goals/priorities and identify potential changes in their coping.

"Things That You Thought Mattered, None of That Matters": A Qualitative Exploration of Family Caregiver Values following Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

BACKGROUND: Intentional exploration, or elicitation, of patient and family values-who/what matters most-is critical to the delivery of person-centered care, yet the values elicitation experiences of family caregivers have been understudied. Understanding caregiver experiences discussing, reflecting upon, and acting on their values is critical to optimizing health decisions after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the values elicitation experiences of family caregivers of individuals with an LVAD in the postimplantation period. METHODS: This was a qualitative descriptive study of LVAD caregivers recruited from an outpatient clinic in the southeast United States. After completing one-on-one semistructured interviews, participants' transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Interviewed caregivers (n = 21) were 27 to 76 years old, with 67% African American, 76% female, 76% urban-dwelling, and 62% a spouse/partner. LVAD implantation was an impactful experience prompting caregiver reevaluation of their values; these values became instrumental to navigating decisions and managing stressors from their caregiving role. Three broad themes of caregiver values elicitation experiences emerged: (1) caregivers leverage their values for strength and guidance in navigating their caregiving role, (2) LVAD implantation prompts (re)evaluation of relationships and priorities, and (3) caregivers convey their goals and priorities when deemed relevant to patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Having a care recipient undergo LVAD implantation prompted caregivers to reevaluate their values, which were used to navigate caregiving decisions and stressors. Findings highlight the need for healthcare professionals to engage and support caregivers after LVAD implantation.

Linking Cardiac Psychology and Cardiovascular Medicine via Self-Determination Theory and Shared Decision-Making.

Despite considerable progress in recent years, research in cardiac psychology is not widely translated into routine practice by clinical cardiologists or clinical health psychologists. Self-determination theory (SDT), which addresses how basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness contribute to the internalization of motivation, may help bridge this research-practice gap through its application to shared decision-making (SDM). This narrative review discusses the following: (a) brief background information on SDT and SDM, (b) the application of SDT to health behavior change and cardiology interventions, and (c) how SDT and SDM may be merged using a dissemination and implementation (D&I) framework. We address barriers to implementing SDM in cardiology, how SDM and SDT address the need for respect of patient autonomy, and how SDT can enhance D&I of SDM interventions through its focus on autonomy, competence, and relatedness and its consideration of other constructs that facilitate the internalization of motivation.

Healthcare Trajectories and Outcomes in the First Year After Tracheostomy Based on Patient Characteristics.

OBJECTIVES: To define healthcare trajectories after tracheostomy to inform shared decision-making efforts for critically ill patients. DESIGN: Retrospective epidemiologic cohort study. SETTING: California Patient Discharge Database 2018-2019. PATIENTS: Patients who received a tracheostomy. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We tracked 1-year outcomes after tracheostomy, including survival and time alive in and out of a healthcare facility (HCF. Patients were stratified based on surgical status (did the patient require a major operating room procedure or not), age (65 yr old or older and less than 65 yr), pre-ICU comorbid states (frailty, chronic organ dysfunction, cancer, and robustness), and the need for dialysis during the tracheostomy admission. We identified 4,274 nonsurgical adults who received a tracheostomy during the study period with 50.9% being 65 years old or older. Among adults 65 years old or older, median survival after tracheostomy was less than 3 months for individuals with frailty, chronic organ dysfunction, cancer, or dialysis. Median survival was 3 months for adults younger than 65 years with cancer or dialysis. Most patients spent the majority of days alive after a tracheostomy in an HCF in the first 3 months. Older adults had very few days alive and out of an HCF in the first 3 months after tracheostomy. Most patients who ultimately died in the first year after tracheostomy spent almost all days alive in an HCF. CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative mortality and median survival after a tracheostomy were very poor across most ages and groups. Older adults and several subgroups of younger adults experienced high rates of prolonged hospitalization with few days alive and out of an HCF. This information may aid some patients, surrogates, and providers in decision-making.

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.

ENABLE-LVAD: Development and Implementation of a Novel Training Program for Clinicians Supporting Family Caregivers of Patients With a Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant family caregiver (FCG) burnout, there are currently no tested interventions to support the FCG role after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation or formalized training for clinicians to support FCGs. OBJECTIVE: We adapted the existing ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise Before Life Ends) intervention to LVAD clinicians and FCGs and assessed clinical implementation and dissemination. METHODS: ENABLE-LVAD is an interactive, self-paced clinician training coupled with FCG-facing guidebooks and resources. Implementation and dissemination were evaluated by the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework. RESULTS: As of May 2023, 187 clinicians registered for the training, and 41 completed all modules (22.0% completion rate). Of those who completed the training and responded to a 6-month survey, one-third (n = 10, 33.3%) used ENABLE-LVAD with FCGs, and 100% of those planned to continue using it. The primary barrier to completing the training was time. CONCLUSIONS: The ENABLE-LVAD clinician training was successfully disseminated and implemented as a useful resource to support LVAD FCGs.

An Electronically Delivered Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: The EPIC-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Major gaps exist in the routine initiation and dose up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Without novel approaches to improve prescribing, the cumulative benefits of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treatment will be largely unrealized. Direct-to-consumer marketing and shared decision making reflect a culture where patients are increasingly involved in treatment choices, creating opportunities for prescribing interventions that engage patients. METHODS: The EPIC-HF (Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial randomized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction from a diverse health system to usual care versus patient activation tools-a 3-minute video and 1-page checklist-delivered electronically 1 week before, 3 days before, and 24 hours before a cardiology clinic visit. The tools encouraged patients to work collaboratively with their clinicians to "make one positive change" in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prescribing. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with GDMT medication initiations and dose intensifications from immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, compared with usual care during the same period. RESULTS: EPIC-HF enrolled 306 patients, 290 of whom attended a clinic visit during the study period: 145 were sent the patient activation tools and 145 were controls. The median age of patients was 65 years; 29% were female, 11% were Black, 7% were Hispanic, and the median ejection fraction was 32%. Preclinic data revealed significant GDMT opportunities, with no patients on target doses of ß-blocker, sacubitril/valsartan, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. From immediately preceding the cardiology clinic visit to 30 days after, 49.0% in the intervention and 29.7% in the control experienced an initiation or intensification of their GDMT (P=0.001). The majority of these changes were made at the clinician encounter itself and involved dose uptitrations. There were no deaths and no significant differences in hospitalization or emergency department visits at 30 days between groups. CONCLUSIONS: A patient activation tool delivered electronically before a cardiology clinic visit improved clinician intensification of GDMT. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03334188.

Association of Proximity to a Long-Term Acute Care Hospital With Hospital Tracheostomy Practices.

OBJECTIVES: Availability of long-term acute care hospitals has been associated with hospital discharge practices. It is unclear if long-term acute care hospital availability can influence patient care decisions. We sought to determine the association of long-term acute care hospital availability at different hospitals with the likelihood of tracheostomy. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: California Patient Discharge Database, 2016-2018. PATIENTS: Adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using the California Patient Discharge Database 2016-2018, we identified all mechanically ventilated patients and those who received tracheostomy. We determine the association between tracheostomy and the distance between each hospital and the nearest long-term acute care hospital and the number of long-term acute care hospital beds within 20 miles of each hospital. Among 281,502 hospitalizations where a patient received mechanical ventilation, 22,899 (8.1%) received a tracheostomy. Patients admitted to a hospital closer to a long-term acute care hospital compared with those furthest from a long-term acute care hospital had 38.9% (95% CI, 33.3-44.6%) higher odds of tracheostomy (closest hospitals 8.7% vs furthest hospitals 6.3%, adjusted odds ratio = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.40-1.95). Patients had a 32.4% (95% CI, 27.6-37.3%) higher risk of tracheostomy when admitted to a hospital with more long-term acute care hospital beds in the immediate vicinity (most long-term acute care hospital beds within 20 miles 8.9% vs fewest long-term acute care hospital beds 6.7%, adjusted odds ratio = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.31-1.80). Distance to the nearest long-term acute care hospital was inversely correlated with hospital risk-adjusted tracheostomy rates (ρ = -0.25; p < 0.0001). The number of long-term acute care hospital beds within 20 miles was positively correlated with hospital risk-adjusted tracheostomy rates (ρ = 0.22; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Proximity and availability of long-term acute care hospital beds were associated with patient odds of tracheostomy and hospital tracheostomy practices. These findings suggest a hospital effect on tracheostomy decision-making over and above patient case-mix. Future studies focusing on shared decision-making for tracheostomy are needed to ensure goal-concordant care for prolonged mechanical ventilation.

Preferred Role in Health Care Decision Making Over Time in Patients With Heart Failure: My Decision or My Doctor's Decision?

BACKGROUND: Understanding patients' preferred role in decision making can improve patient-centered care. This study aimed to determine change and the predictors of change in preferred decision-making roles over time in patients with heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: During the CASA (Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness) trial, patients' preferred roles in decision making were measured using the Control Preferences Scale (range 1-5; higher = less active; n = 312) at 4 timepoints over 1 year. The effect of the CASA intervention on preferred decision-making roles was tested using generalized linear mixed models. Whether preferences changed over time in the whole population was determined using linear regression. Demographic and health-related factors were examined as predictors of change using multiple linear regression. At baseline, most participants preferred active (score 1-2, 37.2%) or collaborative (score 3, 44.9%) roles. The CASA intervention did not influence preferred decision-making roles (P > 0.1). Preferences significantly changed over 1 year (P < 0.01), becoming more active (82.1%, 84.2%, 89.0%, 90.1% active/collaborative at each timepoint). Among all models and covariates, there were no significant predictors of change (P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferred roles in decision making change over time, but changes are not well predicted. Clinicians should frequently and directly communicate with patients about their preferred decision-making roles.

Health Literacy in Patients Considering a Left Ventricular Assist Device: Findings From the DECIDE-LVAD Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the interaction of health literacy and a shared intervention concerning decision quality in patients considering the destination therapy of left ventricular assist device (DT LVAD) implantation. BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited for the use of decision aids by patients with low health literacy and with life-threatening illnesses. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of the DECIDE-LVAD Trial, a randomized, stepped-wedge trial conducted from 2015-2017 in the United States. The intervention was the integration of a formal shared decision-making intervention. The main outcome was decision quality as measured by LVAD knowledge and values-treatment concordance. Two components of health literacy were measured by the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine and Subjective Numeracy Scale instruments. RESULTS: Of the 228 patients studied, 44% (n = 101) received the formal shared decision-making intervention, and half had low health literacy. Knowledge of LVAD improved for patients with low literacy in the intervention group compared to the control group: the difference in increased knowledge score was 10.6%; P = 0.04. Values-treatment concordance improved significantly for patients with low literacy in the intervention group compared to the control group: the median improvement in values-treatment correlation coefficient was 0.43; P = 0.03. These benefits were not significant in those with adequate literacy (n = 171). Patients with low numeracy (n = 94) did not show significant improvements in either measure of decision quality, and patients with adequate numeracy (n = 134) showed improvement in LVAD knowledge but not in values-treatment concordance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients considering DT LVAD implantation with low literacy showed improvement in decision quality after the integration of a shared decision-making intervention.

Engaging the Wisdom of Older Veterans to Enhance VA Healthcare, Research, and Services.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement helps ensure that research is relevant, clinical innovations are responsive, and healthcare services are patient-centered. OBJECTIVE: Establish and sustain a Veteran engagement board involving older Veterans and caregivers to provide input on aging-related research and clinical demonstration projects. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The Older Veteran Engagement Team (OVET)-a group of eight Veterans and one caregiver who range in age from 62 to 92-was formed in November 2017 and has met monthly since January 2018. The OVET provides feedback on topics that reflect the foci of the VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC) (e.g., physical functioning, hearing health, and emotional wellness/mental health). Ongoing evaluation documents the return on investment of Veteran engagement. MAIN MEASURES: The OVET member and provider/investigator meeting evaluations with longitudinal follow-up at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Return on investment of Veteran engagement is multi-faceted. For OVET, ROI ranges from grant support to improved healthcare quality/efficiency to social-emotional benefits. To date, funding awards total over $2.3 M for NIH and VA-funded projects to which OVET provided substantive feedback. Documented impacts on healthcare services include reductions in patient wait times, more appropriate utilization of services and increased patient satisfaction. Social-emotional benefits include generativity, as OVET members contribute to improving clinical and community-based supports for other Veterans. The OVET provides an opportunity for older Veterans to share their lived experience with trainees and early career investigators who are preparing for careers serving Veterans. CONCLUSION: The OVET is similar to other established stakeholder engagement groups; team members offer their individual viewpoints at any stage of research, clinical demonstration, or quality improvement projects. The OVET provides a mechanism for the voice of older Veterans and caregivers to shape aspects of individual projects. Importantly, these projects support patient-centered care and promote the characteristics of an age-friendly healthcare system.

N-of-1 trials to facilitate evidence-based deprescribing: Rationale and case study.

Deprescribing has emerged as an important aspect of patient-centred medication management but is vastly underutilized in clinical practice. The current narrative review will describe an innovative patient-centred approach to deprescribing-N-of-1 trials. N-of-1 trials involve multiple-period crossover design experiments conducted within individual patients. They enable patients to compare the effects of two or more treatments or, in the case of deprescribing N-of-1 trials, continuation with a current treatment versus no treatment or placebo. N-of-1 trials are distinct from traditional between-patient studies such as parallel-group or crossover designs which provide an average effect across a group of patients and obscure differences between individuals. By generating data on the effect of an intervention for the individual rather than the population, N-of-1 trials can promote therapeutic precision. N-of-1 trials are a particularly appealing strategy to inform deprescribing because they can generate individual-level evidence for deprescribing when evidence is uncertain, and can thus allay patient and physician concerns about discontinuing medications. To illustrate the use of deprescribing N-of-1 trials, we share a case example of an ongoing series of N-of-1 trials that compare maintenance versus deprescribing of beta-blockers in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. By providing quantifiable data on patient-reported outcomes, promoting personalized pharmacotherapy, and facilitating shared decision making, N-of-1 trials represent a potentially transformative strategy to address polypharmacy.

The impact of government-mandated shared decision-making for implantable defibrillators: A natural experiment.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) mandated that patients considering implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death undergo shared decision-making (SDM) using a decision-aid. OBJECTIVE: To observe the impact of the CMS's mandate on core measures of SDM using a natural experiment. RESEARCH DESIGN, SUBJECTS, AND MEASURES: Patients who underwent implantation of a primary prevention ICD within the Emory Healthcare system between 2017-2019 (pre and post SDM mandate) were surveyed. Survey domains included knowledge about the ICD, decisional conflict, values-choice concordance, and engagement in decision-making. Patients who had an ICD implant after the mandate were also asked about their views of the decision aid (DA). Responses of patients who had ICD implanted prior to the mandate were compared to those after the mandate using either Student t test or Chi-Squared tests. RESULTS: Of 101 patients who completed the survey, 45 had an ICD placed before the mandate and 56 had an ICD placed after. There were no major differences between knowledge, decisional conflict, values choice concordance, or patient engagement. Compared to patients with ICDs placed before the mandate, patients with ICDs after the mandate were more likely to subjectively feel more informed about the benefits of the procedure but were less likely to be able to correctly identify the frequency of complications. CONCLUSIONS: Policy effects to promote SDM that solely focus on a decision-aid may not substantively impact patient centered care.

Decision Support Needs for Patients with Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis.

Social workers in healthcare settings often support patient decision-making processes for complex medical decisions. The objective of this study was to examine decision support needs for patients considering aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis. Seventeen qualitative interviews were conducted to explore treatment decision experiences of patients who accepted AVR. Analysis was conducted using a mixed inductive-deductive approach. Fear was a prevalent response for most participants in the face of AVR. Two general paths of decision making emerged: an "active" information seeking approach, or a "passive" simplicity seeking approach. Patients with unique clinical presentations felt alienated by the decision-making process. Acknowledging fear while understanding different decision-making styles provide opportunities for social workers and other members of multidisciplinary teams to support complex patient decisions.

Stability of Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders in Hospitalized Adults: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Prior work has shown substantial between-hospital variation in do-not-resuscitate orders, but stability of do-not-resuscitate preferences between hospitalizations and the institutional influence on do-not-resuscitate reversals are unclear. We determined the extent of do-not-resuscitate reversals between hospitalizations and the association of the readmission hospital with do-not-resuscitate reversal. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: California Patient Discharge Database, 2016-2018. PATIENTS: Nonsurgical patients admitted to an acute care hospital with an early do-not-resuscitate order (within 24 hr of admission). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified nonsurgical adult patients who survived an initial hospitalization with an early-do-not-resuscitate order and were readmitted within 30 days. The primary outcome was the association of do-not-resuscitate reversal with readmission to the same or different hospital from the initial hospital. Secondary outcomes included association of readmission to a low versus high do-not-resuscitate-rate hospital with do-not-resuscitate reversal. Among 49,336 patients readmitted within 30 days following a first do-not-resuscitate hospitalization, 22,251 (45.1%) experienced do-not-resuscitate reversal upon readmission. Patients readmitted to a different hospital versus the same hospital were at higher risk of do-not-resuscitate reversal (59.5% vs 38.5%; p < 0.001; adjusted odds ratio = 2.4; 95% CI, 2.3-2.5). Patients readmitted to low versus high do-not-resuscitate-rate hospitals were more likely to have do-not-resuscitate reversals (do-not-resuscitate-rate quartile 1 77.0% vs quartile 4 27.2%; p < 0.001; adjusted odds ratio = 11.9; 95% CI, 10.7-13.2). When readmitted to a different versus the same hospital, patients with do-not-resuscitate reversal had higher rates of mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6-2.1) and hospital death (adjusted odds ratio = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3). CONCLUSIONS: Do-not-resuscitate reversals at the time of readmission are more common than previously reported. Although changes in patient preferences may partially explain between-hospital differences, we observed a strong hospital effect contributing to high do-not-resuscitate-reversal rates with significant implications for patient outcomes and resource.

Choosing Between Mastectomy and Breast-Conserving Therapy: Is Patient Distress an Influencing Factor?

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) offers oncologic outcomes similar to those of mastectomy, yet many patients, when provided the option, choose mastectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between patient-reported distress and surgical decisions and to determine factors predictive of choosing BCT versus mastectomy. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer deemed candidates for BCT who completed a distress screen at their initial visit to an academic institution between 2016 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. This screening tool captures distress in emotional, social, health, and practical domains on a scale of 0 to 10. The distress scores were compared against surgical decisions using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Patient factors associated with surgical choice were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Student's t tests. A two-sided p value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 506 patients deemed eligible for BCT, 430 (85%) chose BCT and 76 (15%) pursued mastectomy. The distress levels did not differ significantly between the surgical options. The patients who underwent mastectomy were on the average younger (50.7 vs 60.4 years; p < 0.0001), presented with palpable masses (p < 0.0001), had stage 0, 2, or 3 versus stage 1 disease (p < 0.0001), sought consultation for second opinions (19.7% vs 8.6%; p = 0.0032), received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (31.6% vs 16.3%; p = 0.0016), or had deleterious gene mutations (21.1% vs 5.1%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Distress was not associated with the pursuit of surgical treatment. Rather, younger age, search for a second opinion, and a palpable mass present at presentation were associated with more aggressive surgical decisions. Understanding factors that influence surgical decision-making is critical in guiding informed decisions that reflect patient values.