Does advance care planning in addition to usual care reduce hospitalisation for patients with advanced heart failure: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: People with advanced heart failure have repeated hospital admissions. Advance care planning can support patient preferences, but studies in people with heart failure have not been assessed. AIM: To evaluate the literature regarding advance care planning in heart failure. DESIGN: Systematic review and narrative analysis (PROSPERO CRD42017059190). DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched (1990 to 23 March 2017): MEDLINE(R), Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Scopus. Four journals were hand searched. Two independent researchers screened against eligibility criteria. One reviewer extracted all data and a sample by a second. Quality was assessed by Cochrane Risk of Bias or the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Tool for Cohort Studies. RESULTS: Out of the 1713 articles, 8 were included representing 14,357 participants from in/outpatient settings from five countries. Two randomised controlled trials and one observational study assessed planning as part of a specialist palliative care intervention; one randomised controlled trial assessed planning in addition to usual cardiology care; one randomised controlled trial and one observational study assessed planning in an integrated cardiology-palliative care model; one observational study assessed evidence of planning (advance directive) as part of usual care and one observational study was a secondary analysis of trial participants coded Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Advance care planning: (1) reduced hospitalisation (5/7 studies); (2) increased referral/use of palliative services (4/4 studies); and (3) supported deaths in the patient-preferred place (2/2 studies). CONCLUSION: Advance care planning as part of specialist palliative care reduces hospitalisation. Preliminary studies of planning integrated into generic care, accessing specialist palliative care support if needed, are promising.

Breathlessness at rest is not the dominant presentation of patients admitted with heart failure.

AIMS: Many assume that most patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) are short of breath at rest (SOBAR). The National HF Audit for England and Wales suggests that this assumption is false, which has profound implications for management METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective case-note review was carried out of patients hospitalized with HF to determine how many present with shortness of breath at rest or are comfortable at rest but breathless on slight exertion (CARBOSE). Vital signs were tracked for 24 h and mortality for 180 days. Of 311 patients, those who were SOBAR (42%) had higher median heart rate (HR) (100 vs. 85 b.p.m.; P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (SBP) (141 vs. 122 mmHg; P < 0.001), and respiratory rate (RR) (24 vs. 18 breaths/min; P < 0.001) compared with those who were CARBOSE (56%). Vital signs changed little in those who were CARBOSE over the first 4-6 h, but SBP (141-128 mmHg; P < 0.001), HR (100-90 b.p.m.; P = 0.002), and RR (24-20 breaths/min; P < 0.001) fell in those who were SOBAR. At presentation, SBP was >125 mmHg in 73% of patients who were SOBAR and in 46% who were CARBOSE, dropping to 52% and 37%, respectively, by 4-6 h. Mortality amongst those who were SOBAR and those who were CARBOSE was, respectively, 19% and 34% (odds ratio 2.29; P = 0.005, 95% confidence interval 1.29-4.06). CONCLUSION: Many patients admitted with HF are CARBOSE. Shortness of breath at rest may be more alarming, but those who are CARBOSE have a worse prognosis, perhaps reflecting more severe right heart dysfunction. Clinical trials of hospitalized HF may inappropriately exclude patients if they focus on shortness of breath at rest rather than peripheral congestion.