Exploring the Inclusion of Person-Centered Care Domains in Stroke Transitions of Care Interventions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: Health care teams along the stroke recovery continuum have a responsibility to support care transitions and return to the community. Ideally, individualized care will consider patient and family preferences, best available evidence, and health care professional input. Person-centered care can improve patient-practitioner interactions through shared decision-making in which health professionals and institutions are sensitive to those for whom they provide care. However, it is unclear how the concepts of person-centered care have been described in reports of stroke transitional care interventions. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken. We retrieved all included articles (n=17) and evaluated the extent to which each intervention explicitly addressed 7 domains of person-centered care: alignment of care with patients' values, preferences, and needs; coordination of care; information and education; physical comfort; emotional support; family and friend involvement; and smooth transition and continuity of care. RESULTS: Most of the articles included some aspects of person-centeredness; we found that certain domains were not addressed in the descriptions of transitional care interventions, and no articles mentioned all 7 domains of person-centered care. We identified 3 implications for practice and research: (1) delineating person-centered care components when reporting interventions, (2) elucidating social and cultural factors relevant to the study sample and intervention, and (3) clearly describing the role of family and nonmedical support in the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is still room for greater consistency in the reporting of person-centeredness in stroke transitions of care interventions, despite a long-standing definition and conceptualization of person-centered care in academic and clinically focused literature.

Contribution of individual and cumulative frailty-related health deficits on cardiac rehabilitation completion.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high burden of frailty among cardiac rehabilitation (CR) participants, it is unclear which frailty-related deficits are related to program completion. METHODS: Data from a single-centre exercise- and education-based CR program were included. A frailty index (FI) based on 25 health deficits was constructed. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of CR completion based on the presence of individual FI items. The odds of completion for cumulative deficits related to biomarkers, body composition, quality of life, as well as a composite of traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factor domains were examined. RESULTS: A total of 3,756 individuals were included in analyses. Eight of 25 FI variables were positively associated with program completion while 8 others were negatively associated with completion. The variable with the strongest positive association was the food frequency questionnaire score (OR 1.27 (95% CI 1.14, 1.41), whereas the deficit with strongest negative association was a decline in health over the last year (OR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58, 0.93). An increased number of cardiovascular deficits were associated with an increased odds of CR completion (OR per 1 deficit increase 1.16 (95% CI 1.11, 1.22)). A higher number of traditional CR deficits were predictive of CR completion (OR 1.22 (95% CI 1.16, 1.29)), but non-traditional measures predicted non-completion (OR 0.95 (95% CI 0.92, 0.97)). CONCLUSION: A greater number of non-traditional cardiovascular deficits was associated with non-completion. These data should be used to implement intervention to patients who are most vulnerable to drop out to maximize retention.

Comparing Virtual and Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation on Changes in Frailty.

Many patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) are frail. Center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) can improve frailty; however, whether virtual CR provides similar frailty improvements has not been examined. To answer this question, we (1) compared the effect of virtual and accelerated center-based CR on frailty and (2) determined if admission frailty affected frailty change and CVD biomarkers. The virtual and accelerated center-based CR programs provided exercise and education on nutrition, medication, exercise safety, and CVD. Frailty was measured with a 65-item frailty index. The primary outcome, frailty change, was analyzed with a two-way mixed ANOVA. Simple slopes analysis determined whether admission frailty affected frailty and CVD biomarker change by CR model type. Our results showed that admission frailty was higher in center-based versus virtual participants. However, we observed no main effect of CR model on frailty change. Results also revealed that participants who were frailer at CR admission observed greater frailty improvements and reductions in triglyceride and cholesterol levels when completing virtual versus accelerated center-based CR. Even though both program models did not change frailty, higher admission frailty was associated with greater frailty reductions and change to some CVD biomarkers in virtual CR.