Rogers Joseph G, Patel Chetan B, Mentz Robert J, Granger Bradi B, Steinhauser Karen E, Fiuzat Mona, Adams Patricia A, Speck Adam, Johnson Kimberly S, Krishnamoorthy Arun, Yang Hongqiu, Anstrom Kevin J, Dodson Gwen C, Taylor Donald H, Kirchner Jerry L, Mark Daniel B, O'Connor Christopher M, Tulsky James A
Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jul 18;70(3):331-341. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.030.
Advanced heart failure (HF) is characterized by high morbidity and mortality. Conventional therapy may not sufficiently reduce patient suffering and maximize quality of life.
The authors investigated whether an interdisciplinary palliative care intervention in addition to evidence-based HF care improves certain outcomes.
The authors randomized 150 patients with advanced HF between August 15, 2012, and June 25, 2015, to usual care (UC) (n = 75) or UC plus a palliative care intervention (UC + PAL) (n = 75) at a single center. Primary endpoints were 2 quality-of-life measurements, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall summary and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (FACIT-Pal), assessed at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included assessments of depression and anxiety (measured via the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), spiritual well-being (measured via the FACIT-Spiritual Well-Being scale [FACIT-Sp]), hospitalizations, and mortality.
Patients randomized to UC + PAL versus UC alone had clinically significant incremental improvement in KCCQ and FACIT-Pal scores from randomization to 6 months (KCCQ difference = 9.49 points, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94 to 18.05, p = 0.030; FACIT-Pal difference = 11.77 points, 95% CI: 0.84 to 22.71, p = 0.035). Depression improved in UC + PAL patients (HADS-depression difference = -1.94 points; p = 0.020) versus UC-alone patients, with similar findings for anxiety (HADS-anxiety difference = -1.83 points; p = 0.048). Spiritual well-being was improved in UC + PAL versus UC-alone patients (FACIT-Sp difference = 3.98 points; p = 0.027). Randomization to UC + PAL did not affect rehospitalization or mortality.
An interdisciplinary palliative care intervention in advanced HF patients showed consistently greater benefits in quality of life, anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being compared with UC alone. (Palliative Care in Heart Failure [PAL-HF]; NCT01589601).
晚期心力衰竭(HF)的特点是高发病率和高死亡率。传统治疗可能无法充分减轻患者痛苦并最大限度地提高生活质量。
作者调查了在基于证据的心力衰竭护理基础上增加多学科姑息治疗干预是否能改善某些结局。
作者于2012年8月15日至2015年6月25日期间,将150例晚期心力衰竭患者在单一中心随机分为常规治疗组(UC)(n = 75)或常规治疗加姑息治疗干预组(UC + PAL)(n = 75)。主要终点是在6个月时进行的两项生活质量测量,即堪萨斯城心肌病问卷(KCCQ)总体总结和慢性病治疗功能评估-姑息治疗量表(FACIT-Pal)。次要终点包括抑郁和焦虑评估(通过医院焦虑抑郁量表[HADS]测量)、精神健康(通过FACIT-精神健康量表[FACIT-Sp]测量)、住院情况和死亡率。
随机分配至UC + PAL组与单独UC组的患者,从随机分组到6个月时,KCCQ和FACIT-Pal评分有临床上显著的增量改善(KCCQ差异= 9.49分,95%置信区间[CI]:0.94至18.05,p = 0.030;FACIT-Pal差异= 11.77分,95% CI:0.84至22.71,p = 0.035)。与单独UC组患者相比,UC + PAL组患者的抑郁有所改善(HADS-抑郁差异= -1.94分;p = 0.020),焦虑情况也有类似结果(HADS-焦虑差异= -1.83分;p = 0.048)。与单独UC组患者相比,UC + PAL组患者的精神健康得到改善(FACIT-Sp差异= 3.98分;p = 0.027)。随机分配至UC + PAL组对再次住院或死亡率无影响。
与单独的常规治疗相比,对晚期心力衰竭患者进行多学科姑息治疗干预在生活质量、焦虑、抑郁和精神健康方面始终显示出更大益处。(心力衰竭姑息治疗[PAL-HF];NCT01589601)