Hospice, opiates, and acute care service use among the elderly before death from heart failure or cancer.

BACKGROUND: Advances in heart failure (HF) treatments have prolonged survival, but more patients die of HF than of any type of cancer. Little is known about the current practice in end-of-life (EOL) care in HF. METHODS: Two EOL cohorts (HF and cancer) were identified using Medicare data linked with pharmacy and cancer registry data. We assessed use of hospice, opiates, and acute care services (hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits, intensive care unit [ICU] admissions, and death in acute care). Time trends and predictors of use were assessed using multivariate regression including demographics and cardiovascular and noncardiovasuclar comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 5,836 HF patients with median age of 85, 77% female and 4% black, 20% were referred to hospice compared to 51% of 7,565 cancer patients. A modest rise in hospice use over time was parallel in the 2 groups. Twenty-two percent of HF patients filled opiate prescriptions during 60 days before death compared to 46% of cancer patients. Use of acute care services in the 30 days before death was higher for HF (64% vs 39% for ED visits, 60% vs 45% for hospitalizations, and 19% vs 7% for ICU admission). More HF patients died during acute hospitalizations than cancer patients (39% vs 21%). CONCLUSION: Patients dying of HF were less likely to be supported by hospice and opiates but more likely to die in hospitals than patients with cancer. Our study suggests that opportunities may exist to improve hospice and opiate use in HF patients.

Heart failure and diabetes: collateral benefit of chronic disease management.

To test the hypothesis that a focus on heart failure (HF) care may be associated with inadequate diabetes care, the authors screened 78 patients (aged 64+/-11 years; 69% male) with diabetes enrolled in an HF disease management program for diabetes care as recommended by the American Diabetes Association (ADA). Ninety-five percent of patients had hemoglobin A1c levels measured within 12 months, and 71% monitored their glucose at least once daily. Most patients received counseling regarding diabetic diet and exercise, and approximately 80% reported receiving regular eye and foot examinations. Mean hemoglobin A1c level was 7.8+/-1.9%. There was no relationship between hemoglobin A1c levels and New York Heart Association class or history of HF hospitalizations. Contrary to the authors' hypothesis, patients in an HF disease management program demonstrated levels of diabetic care close to ADA goals. "Collateral benefit" of HF disease management may contribute to improved patient outcomes in diabetic patients with HF.

Intensity and focus of heart failure disease management after hospital discharge.

BACKGROUND: Although features of heart failure disease management programs are broadly outlined, little is known about which interventions are actually used in the outpatient setting or which patients are most likely to require interventions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between September 2001 and June 2002, we enrolled 32 patients admitted to the Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart Failure Services, Boston, Mass, with decompensated heart failure. The intensity of care and outcomes of these patients were prospectively tracked for more than 90 days. During this time, there were 325 patient contacts (median 8.5 per patient), including 247 calls (median 7 per patient) and 78 clinic visits (median 2 per patient). Brigham and Women's Hospital clinicians adjusted diuretics a total of 109 times (median 2.5 times per patient). When frequency of diuretic adjustments was used to estimate the intensity of care, higher values of blood urea nitrogen at discharge predicted an increased intensity of care during the 90-day follow-up (relative risk [RR] 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.3, P = .02). When frequency of clinic visits, telephone calls, and diuretic adjustments were used to estimate intensity of care, discharge creatinine (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99-1.06, P = .05), discharge blood urea nitrogen (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04-1.23, P = .004), and length of stay (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, P = .04) were predictors of the composite end point. CONCLUSIONS: Even after undergoing optimization of medications during admission for acute heart failure, patients in a comprehensive disease management program required frequent interventions to maintain clinical stability. Renal dysfunction was the strongest predictor of increased interventions and worse outcome.

Frequency and impact of delayed decisions regarding heart transplantation on long-term outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to characterize decisions regarding listing of heart transplant candidates and to determine the impact of delayed listing for a transplant on survival. BACKGROUND: Evaluation and listing for heart transplantation have evolved over the past decade, with the complex decision process often extending beyond the time of initial review. Little is known about the current impact of decisions and timing of listing on outcomes. METHODS: Decisions were prospectively recorded during the initial committee discussions regarding patients referred for heart transplant evaluation. Survival and transplantation rates were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 214 patients were evaluated for heart transplantation (age 49 +/- 11 years, ejection fraction 21 +/- 9%, New York Heart Association class III +/- I, peak oxygen consumption 13 +/- 4 ml/kg/min). At the initial evaluation, 44% of patients were deemed eligible, 25% were potentially eligible, 19% were ineligible, and 12% were deferred. For eligible patients, 37% of patients were listed within 10 days of evaluation, and a total of 71% of patients were ever listed. Regardless of transplantation, the three-year survival rate in eligible patients not listed early was similar to that in patients listed immediately (85% vs. 77%, p = 0.34). Ineligible and potentially eligible patients had a higher three-year mortality rate than did eligible patients if transplantation occurred (51% vs. 17%, p < 0.001) or not (57% vs. 19%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Using current accepted guidelines, many patients referred for transplant evaluation were not considered eligible for transplantation, and those who were eligible were not often listed immediately. Eligible patients not listed initially did well in the long term, and patients with relative contraindications had worse outcomes with or without a transplant.