Oral modified release morphine for breathlessness in chronic heart failure: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: Morphine is shown to relieve chronic breathlessness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. There are no definitive data in people with heart failure. We aimed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 12 weeks morphine therapy for the relief of chronic breathlessness in people with chronic heart failure compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS: Parallel group, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of 20 mg daily oral modified release morphine was conducted in 13 sites in England and Scotland: hospital/community cardiology or palliative care outpatients. The primary analysis compared between-group numerical rating scale average breathlessness/24 hours at week 4 using a covariance pattern linear mixed model. Secondary outcomes included treatment-emergent harms (worse or new). The trial closed early due to slow recruitment, randomizing 45 participants [average age 72 (range 39-89) years; 84% men; 98% New York Heart Association class III]. For the primary analysis, the adjusted mean difference was 0.26 (95% confidence interval, -0.86 to 1.37) in favour of placebo. All other breathlessness measures improved in both groups (week 4 change-from-baseline) but by more in those assigned to morphine. Neither group was excessively drowsy at baseline or week 4. There were no between-group differences in quality of life (Kansas) or cognition (Montreal) at any time point. There was no exercise-related desaturation and no change between baseline and week 4 in either group. There was no change in vital signs at week 4. The natriuretic peptide measures fell in both groups but by more in the morphine group [morphine 2169 (1092, 3851) pg/mL vs. placebo 2851 (1694, 5437)] pg/mL. There was no excess serious adverse events in the morphine group. Treatment-emergent harms during the first week were more common in the morphine group; all apart from 1 were ≤ grade 2. CONCLUSIONS: We could not answer our primary objectives due to inadequate power. However, we provide novel placebo-controlled medium-term benefit and safety data useful for clinical practice and future trial design. Morphine should only be prescribed in this population when other measures are unhelpful and with early management of side effects.

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.

Which patients with heart failure should receive specialist palliative care?

AIMS: We investigated which patients with heart failure (HF) should receive specialist palliative care (SPC) by first creating a definition of need for SPC in patients hospitalised with HF using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and then testing this definition using the outcome of days alive and out of hospital (DAOH). We also evaluated which baseline variables predicted need for SPC and whether those with this need received SPC. METHODS AND RESULTS: PROMs assessing quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and mood were administered at baseline and every 4 months. SPC need was defined as persistently severe impairment of any PROM without improvement (or severe impairment immediately preceding death). We then tested whether need for SPC, so defined, was reflected in DAOH, a measure which combines length of stay, days of hospital re-admission, and days lost due to death. Of 272 patients recruited, 74 (27%) met the definition of SPC needs. These patients lived one third fewer DAOH than those without SPC need (and less than a quarter of QoL-adjusted DAOH). A Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) summary score of <29 identified patients who subsequently had SPC needs (area under receiver operating characteristic curve 0.78). Twenty-four per cent of patients with SPC needs actually received SPC (n = 18). CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of patients hospitalised with HF had a need for SPC and were identified by a low KCCQ score on admission. Those with SPC need spent many fewer DAOH and their DAOH were of significantly worse quality. Very few patients with SPC needs accessed SPC services.

Palliative care needs in patients hospitalized with heart failure (PCHF) study: rationale and design.

AIMS: The primary aim of this study is to provide data to inform the design of a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) of a palliative care (PC) intervention in heart failure (HF). We will identify an appropriate study population with a high prevalence of PC needs defined using quantifiable measures. We will also identify which components a specific and targeted PC intervention in HF should include and attempt to define the most relevant trial outcomes. METHODS: An unselected, prospective, near-consecutive, cohort of patients admitted to hospital with acute decompensated HF will be enrolled over a 2-year period. All potential participants will be screened using B-type natriuretic peptide and echocardiography, and all those enrolled will be extensively characterized in terms of their HF status, comorbidity, and PC needs. Quantitative assessment of PC needs will include evaluation of general and disease-specific quality of life, mood, symptom burden, caregiver burden, and end of life care. Inpatient assessments will be performed and after discharge outpatient assessments will be carried out every 4 months for up to 2.5 years. Participants will be followed up for a minimum of 1 year for hospital admissions, and place and cause of death. Methods for identifying patients with HF with PC needs will be evaluated, and estimates of healthcare utilisation performed. CONCLUSION: By assessing the prevalence of these needs, describing how these needs change over time, and evaluating how best PC needs can be identified, we will provide the foundation for designing an RCT of a PC intervention in HF.

Palliative care for people with heart failure: summary of current evidence and future direction.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a common condition with a significant physical and psychological burden for patients and their families. The need for supportive and palliative care: It is well recognised that palliative care is important in patients with advanced heart failure. WHAT IS KNOWN: Heart failure patients have limited access to palliative care services. Barriers to palliative care include difficult prognostication due to the unpredictable disease trajectory and inadequate initiation of conversations about end-of-life care. WHAT IS NOT KNOWN: There are gaps in the evidence for symptom control, especially for symptoms other than pain or dyspnoea, but recommendations are becoming increasingly evidence based. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH, POLICY AND PRACTICE: There are challenges to research in this area although progress is being made with increasing numbers of trials and use of novel research methods. Integrated models of care based on symptom triggers rather than prognosis are recommended. At the centre is excellent communication both with the patient and between services to ensure the best possible care.

ICDs in end-stage heart failure.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in selected patients with chronic heart failure but prognostic benefit is likely to attenuate with progression to end-stage heart failure. The incidence of multiple futile ICD shocks before death is uncertain. Only individual patients, supported by their healthcare professionals, can decide when ICD therapy becomes futile in end-stage heart failure. Despite consensus that ICD deactivation should be routinely discussed, this rarely occurs in clinical practice for many reasons including uncertainty about when to initiate these discussions and reluctance to confront death and dying. Patient and carer opinions about end-stage heart failure and ICD deactivation may not meet professional expectations. Future research should focus on these opinions and examine interventions that bridge the gap between best practice and the reality of current clinical practice.