Suppr超能文献

协作式护理干预对比常规护理对慢性心力衰竭患者健康状况的影响:CASA 随机临床试验。

Effect of a Collaborative Care Intervention vs Usual Care on Health Status of Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: The CASA Randomized Clinical Trial.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Department of Veterans Affairs, Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Denver.

Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Apr 1;178(4):511-519. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.8667.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Many patients with chronic heart failure experience reduced health status despite receiving conventional therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a symptom and psychosocial collaborative care intervention improves heart failure-specific health status, depression, and symptom burden in patients with heart failure.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A single-blind, 2-arm, multisite randomized clinical trial was conducted at Veterans Affairs, academic, and safety-net health systems in Colorado among outpatients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced health status recruited between August 2012 and April 2015. Data from all participants were included regardless of level of participation, using an intent-to-treat approach.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive the Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness (CASA) intervention or usual care. The CASA intervention included collaborative symptom care provided by a nurse and psychosocial care provided by a social worker, both of whom worked with the patients' primary care clinicians and were supervised by a study primary care clinician, cardiologist, and palliative care physician.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was patient-reported heart failure-specific health status, measured by difference in change scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (range, 0-100) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included depression (measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire), anxiety (measured by the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire), overall symptom distress (measured by the General Symptom Distress Scale), specific symptoms (pain, fatigue, and shortness of breath), number of hospitalizations, and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 314 patients randomized (157 to intervention arm and 157 to control arm), there were 67 women and 247 men, mean (SD) age was 65.5 (11.4) years, and 178 (56.7%) had reduced ejection fraction. At 6 months, the mean Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score improved 5.5 points in the intervention arm and 2.9 points in the control arm (difference, 2.6; 95% CI, -1.3 to 6.6; P = .19). Among secondary outcomes, depressive symptoms and fatigue improved at 6 months with CASA (effect size of -0.29 [95% CI, -0.53 to -0.04] for depressive symptoms and -0.30 [95% CI, -0.55 to -0.06] for fatigue; P = .02 for both). There were no significant changes in overall symptom distress, pain, shortness of breath, or number of hospitalizations. Mortality at 12 months was similar in both arms (10 patients died receiving CASA, and 13 patients died receiving usual care; P = .52).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This multisite randomized clinical trial of the CASA intervention did not demonstrate improved heart failure-specific health status. Secondary outcomes of depression and fatigue, both difficult symptoms to treat in heart failure, improved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01739686.

摘要

重要性

尽管接受了常规治疗,许多慢性心力衰竭患者的健康状况仍会下降。

目的

确定症状和心理社会协作护理干预是否能改善心力衰竭患者的心力衰竭特异性健康状况、抑郁和症状负担。

设计、地点和参与者:这是一项在科罗拉多州退伍军人事务部、学术和安全网卫生系统中进行的单盲、2 臂、多地点随机临床试验,纳入了 2012 年 8 月至 2015 年 4 月间患有症状性心力衰竭和健康状况下降的门诊患者,所有参与者的数据均包括在内,无论参与程度如何,均采用意向治疗方法。

干预措施

患者随机分为 1:1 接受协作护理以减轻症状和适应疾病(CASA)干预或常规护理。CASA 干预包括由护士提供的协作症状护理和由社会工作者提供的心理社会护理,他们都与患者的初级保健临床医生合作,并由研究初级保健临床医生、心脏病专家和姑息治疗医生进行监督。

主要结局和测量指标

主要结局是患者报告的心力衰竭特异性健康状况,通过 6 个月时堪萨斯城心肌病问卷(范围 0-100)变化分数的差异来衡量。次要结局包括抑郁(通过 9 项患者健康问卷衡量)、焦虑(通过 7 项一般焦虑障碍问卷衡量)、整体症状困扰(通过一般症状困扰量表衡量)、特定症状(疼痛、疲劳和呼吸急促)、住院次数和死亡率。

结果

在 314 名随机分组的患者(干预组 157 名,对照组 157 名)中,有 67 名女性和 247 名男性,平均(SD)年龄为 65.5(11.4)岁,178 名(56.7%)射血分数降低。在 6 个月时,干预组的堪萨斯城心肌病问卷评分平均提高了 5.5 分,对照组提高了 2.9 分(差异,2.6;95%CI,-1.3 至 6.6;P=0.19)。在次要结局中,抑郁症状和疲劳在 6 个月时通过 CASA 得到改善(抑郁症状的效应大小为-0.29[95%CI,-0.53 至 -0.04],疲劳为-0.30[95%CI,-0.55 至 -0.06];均 P=0.02)。整体症状困扰、疼痛、呼吸急促或住院次数均无显著变化。在 12 个月时,两组的死亡率相似(接受 CASA 治疗的 10 名患者死亡,接受常规治疗的 13 名患者死亡;P=0.52)。

结论和相关性

这项 CASA 干预的多地点随机临床试验并未显示出改善心力衰竭特异性健康状况。治疗心力衰竭时难以治疗的两种次要结局——抑郁和疲劳均得到改善。

试验注册

clinicaltrials.gov 标识符:NCT01739686。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

5
Heart Failure in Older Patients: An Update.老年患者心力衰竭:最新进展
J Clin Med. 2025 Mar 14;14(6):1982. doi: 10.3390/jcm14061982.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验