The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool to assess symptom burden in decompensated cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: While there is a growing need for interventions addressing symptom burden in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC), the lack of validated symptom assessment tools is a critical barrier. We investigated the psychometric properties of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) in a longitudinal cohort of patients with DC. METHODS: Adult outpatients with DC were prospectively recruited from a liver transplant center and completed ESAS-r at baseline and week 12. We examined reliability, floor/ceiling effects, structural validity, and known-groups validity. We examined the convergent and predictive validity of ESAS-r with health-related quality of life using the Short Form Liver Disease Quality of Life (SF-LDQOL) and responsiveness to changes in anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: From August 2018 to September 2022, 218 patients (9% Child-Pugh A, 59% Child-Pugh B, and 32% Child-Pugh C) were prospectively recruited and completed the ESAS-r, SF-LDQOL, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at baseline and week 12 (n = 135). ESAS-r had strong reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.86), structural validity (comparative fit index 0.95), known-groups validity (Child-Pugh A: 25.1 vs. B: 37.5 vs. C: 41.4, p = 0.006), and convergent validity (r = -0.67 with SF-LDQOL). Floor effects were 9% and ceiling effects were 0.5%. Changes in ESAS-r scores from baseline to week 12 significantly predicted changes in SF-LDQOL (ß = -0.36, p < 0.001), accounting for 30% of the variation. ESAS-r was strongly responsive to clinically meaningful changes in SF-LDQOL, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. CONCLUSIONS: ESAS-r is a reliable, valid, and responsive tool for assessing symptom burden in patients with DC and can predict changes in health-related quality of life. Future directions include its implementation as a key outcome measure in cirrhosis care and clinical trials.

Financial burden following adult liver transplantation is common and associated with adverse recipient outcomes.

The financial impact of liver transplantation has been underexplored. We aimed to identify associations between high financial burden (≥10% annual income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs) and work productivity, financial distress (coping behaviors in response to the financial burden), and financial toxicity (health-related quality of life, HRQOL) among adult recipients of liver transplant. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we surveyed 207 adult recipients of liver transplant across 5 US transplant centers. Financial burden and distress were measured by 25 items adapted from national surveys of cancer survivors. Participants also completed the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment and EQ-5D-5L HRQOL questionnaires. In total, 23% of recipients reported high financial burden which was significantly associated with higher daily activity impairment (32.9% vs. 23.3%, p =0.048). In adjusted analyses, the high financial burden was significantly and independently associated with delayed or foregone medical care (adjusted odds ratio, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.85-8.42) and being unable to afford basic necessities (adjusted odds ratio, 5.12; 95% CI: 1.61-16.37). Recipients experiencing high financial burden had significantly lower self-reported HRQOL as measured by the EQ-5D-5L compared to recipients with low financial burden (67.8 vs. 76.1, p =0.008) and an age-matched and sex-matched US general population (67.8 vs. 79.1, p <0.001). In this multicenter cohort study, nearly 1 in 4 adult recipients of liver transplant experienced a high financial burden, which was significantly associated with delayed or foregone medical care and lower self-reported HRQOL. These findings underscore the need to evaluate and address the financial burden in this population before and after transplantation.

Worrying But Not Acting: The Role of Intolerance of Uncertainty in Explaining the Discrepancy in COVID-19-Related Responses.

Research indicates that Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) is associated with COVID-19 emotional responses, but not necessarily with engaging in COVID-19 preventative behaviors. The current study was designed to further evaluate this discrepancy. Participants (N = 454) completed self-report forms about COVID-19 emotional responses (i.e., fear, worry, sensitivity to symptoms) and COVID-19 behavioral interference/responses (i.e., interference in daily activities, interference due to worry, and engagement in preventative behaviors). IU was positively associated with COVID-19-related emotional responses as well as two of the COVID-19-related behavioral interference/responses (i.e., interference in daily activities and interference due to worry), but negatively predicted engagement in COVID-19 preventative behaviors. Exploratory analyses revealed a significant indirect effect of IU on lower engagement in preventative behaviors through lower belief in the effectiveness of such behaviors. Thus, we further document the role of IU in statistically predicting higher distress but lower levels of adaptive health behaviors. Furthermore, we provide preliminary support for the hypothesis that these relationships may be explained by associations between IU and lower belief in the efficacy of health behaviors. Because some current analyses indicate small effect sizes, future studies should investigate IU alongside other potentially important markers. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10608-022-10321-0.

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of an Advance Care Planning Video Decision Tool for Patients With Advanced Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Transplant-ineligible patients with advanced liver disease rarely receive timely advance care planning (ACP). Tools are needed to educate these patients about medical interventions available at the end of life to promote ACP. METHODS: This single-site pilot randomized controlled trial assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an ACP video decision support tool for improving transplant-ineligible advanced liver disease patients' knowledge about and preferences for end-of-life care. Intervention participants watched a 5-minute video depicting 3 levels of goals of care: life-prolonging care (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR] and intubation), life-limiting care (hospitalization, no CPR/intubation), and comfort care. Control subjects received only a verbal narrative of these 3 levels of goals of care. The primary outcome was feasibility (≥60% enrollment rate). Secondary outcomes included acceptability of the video, patients' knowledge of end-of-life care options (6-item test; range, 0-6), and postintervention goals-of-care and CPR or intubation preferences. RESULTS: We enrolled 85% (n = 50 of 59) of eligible patients randomized to the video (n = 26) or verbal (n = 24) arm. In the video arm, 81% of patients reported being very comfortable watching the video. Patients in the video arm had higher mean knowledge scores (5.7 vs 4.8; P < .001) and were less likely to prefer to receive CPR compared with patients in the verbal arm (35% vs 63%; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: An ACP video decision support tool to improve knowledge about and preferences for end-of-life care is both feasible and highly acceptable to transplant-ineligible patients with advanced liver disease with a high enrollment rate and promising preliminary efficacy. Future studies should examine the efficacy of the ACP video for enhancing the quality of their end-of-life care. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03557086).

Patient and Caregiver Perspectives on Palliative Care in End-Stage Liver Disease.

Background: Specialty palliative care (PC) is underutilized for patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD); however, studies exploring patient and caregiver perceptions of PC are lacking. Objectives: To explore patient and caregiver knowledge, perceptions, and preferences about PC in ESLD management. Setting/Subjects: Individuals with ESLD and their informal caregivers were recruited from a large academic medical center in the United States. Design: We conducted semistructured interviews with 15 patients with ESLD and 14 informal caregivers. Purposive sampling was used to balance both transplant-listed and transplant-ineligible patients. We used a brief description of PC to explore participants' knowledge, perceptions, and preferences about PC. Two raters coded interviews independently (κ = 0.95) using template analysis. Results: Participants' knowledge about PC came primarily from their loved ones' experiences with PC, with many conflating PC with end-of-life care. Transplant-listed patients expressed concern that a PC referral would negatively impact their likelihood of receiving a liver transplant. After hearing a brief description of PC, nearly all participants believed that patients with ESLD should learn about PC soon after diagnosis to help support their illness understanding and coping. Conclusions: Study participants reported limited knowledge of PC and often perceived it as hospice care. After receiving education on PC, nearly all participants, regardless of transplant eligibility, advocated for early introduction of PC in ESLD care. Interventions are needed to educate patients with ESLD and their caregivers on the potential role of PC to overcome misperceptions of PC and allow earlier integration of PC into ESLD management.

Burdensome Transitions of Care for Patients with End-Stage Liver Disease and Their Caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) experience frequent readmissions; however, studies focused on patients' and caregivers' perceptions of their transitional care experiences to identify root causes of burdensome transitions of care are lacking. AIM: To explore the transitional care experiences of patients with ESLD and their caregivers in order to identify their supportive care needs. METHODS: We conducted interviews with 15 patients with ESLD and 14 informal caregivers. We used semi-structured interview guides to explore their experiences since the diagnosis of ESLD including their care transitions. Two raters coded interviews independently (κ = 0.95) using template analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported feeling unprepared to manage their informational, psychosocial, and practical care needs as they transitioned from hospital to home after the diagnosis of ESLD. Delay in the timely receipt of supportive care services addressing these care needs resulted in hospital readmissions, emotional distress, caregiver burnout, reduced work capacity, and financial hardship. Participants shared the following resources that they perceived would improve their quality of care: (1) discharge checklist, (2) online resources, (3) mental health support, (4) caregiver support and training, and (5) financial navigation. CONCLUSION: Transitional care models that attend to the informational, psychosocial, and practical domains of care are needed to better support patients with ESLD and their caregivers at the time of diagnosis and beyond. Without attending to the multidimensional care needs of newly diagnosed patients with ESLD and their caregivers, they are at risk of burdensome transitions of care, high healthcare utilization, and poor health-related quality of life.