Boston University School of Social Work, Boston, Massachusetts.
Palliative Medicine Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Jun 1;3(6):516-519. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.0589.
Palliative care considerations are typically introduced late in the disease trajectory of patients with advanced heart failure (HF), and access to specialty-level palliative care may be limited.
To determine if early initiation of goals of care conversations by a palliative care-trained social worker would improve prognostic understanding, elicit advanced care preferences, and influence care plans for high-risk patients discharged after HF hospitalization.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective, randomized clinical trial of a social worker-led palliative care intervention vs usual care analyzed patients recently hospitalized for management of acute HF who had risk factors for poor prognosis. Analyses were conducted by intention to treat.
Key components of the social worker-led intervention included a structured evaluation of prognostic understanding, end-of-life preferences, symptom burden, and quality of life with routine review by a palliative care physician; communication of this information to treating clinicians; and longitudinal follow-up in the ambulatory setting.
Percentage of patients with physician-level documentation of advanced care preferences and the degree of alignment between patient and cardiologist expectations of prognosis at 6 months.
The study population (N = 50) had a mean (SD) age of 72 (11) years and had a mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.33 (13). Of 50 patients, 41 (82%) had been hospitalized more than once for HF management within 12 months of enrollment. At enrollment, treating physicians anticipated death within a year for 32 patients (64%), but 42 patients (84%) predicted their life expectancy to be longer than 5 years. At 6 months, more patients in the intervention group than in the control group had physician-level documentation of advanced care preferences in the electronic health record (17 [65%] vs 8 [33%]; χ2 = 5.1; P = .02). Surviving patients allocated to intervention were also more likely to revise their baseline prognostic assessment in a direction consistent with the physician's assessment (15 [94%] vs 4 [26%]; χ2 = 14.7; P < .001). Among the 31 survivors at 6 months, there was no measured difference between groups in depression, anxiety, or quality-of-life scores.
Patients at high risk for mortality from HF frequently overestimate their life expectancy. Without an adverse impact on quality of life, prognostic understanding and patient-physician communication regarding goals of care may be enhanced by a focused, social worker-led palliative care intervention that begins in the hospital and continues in the outpatient setting.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02805712.
晚期心力衰竭(HF)患者的姑息治疗考虑通常在疾病轨迹的后期引入,而获得专业水平的姑息治疗可能受到限制。
确定由接受过姑息治疗培训的社会工作者进行早期的目标关怀对话是否会改善预后的理解,引出晚期护理偏好,并影响 HF 住院后高危患者的护理计划。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项前瞻性、随机临床试验,研究了由社会工作者主导的姑息治疗干预措施与常规护理对最近因急性 HF 住院管理且有预后不良风险因素的高危患者的影响。分析采用意向治疗。
由社会工作者主导的干预措施的关键组成部分包括对预后理解、临终偏好、症状负担和生活质量的结构化评估,以及在有姑息治疗医生常规审查的情况下,向治疗临床医生传达这些信息,并在门诊环境中进行纵向随访。
有多少患者的医生对晚期护理偏好进行了记录,以及患者和心脏病专家对 6 个月预后的期望之间的一致性程度。
研究人群(N=50)的平均年龄(SD)为 72(11)岁,平均左心室射血分数为 0.33(13)。在 50 名患者中,41 名(82%)在入组后 12 个月内因 HF 管理而住院治疗超过一次。入组时,治疗医生预计 32 名患者(64%)在一年内死亡,但 42 名患者(84%)预测他们的预期寿命超过 5 年。在 6 个月时,干预组比对照组有更多的患者在电子健康记录中有医生级别的晚期护理偏好记录(17[65%] vs 8[33%];χ2=5.1;P=0.02)。分配到干预组的存活患者也更有可能朝着与医生评估一致的方向修改他们的基线预后评估(15[94%] vs 4[26%];χ2=14.7;P<0.001)。在 6 个月时的 31 名幸存者中,两组之间在抑郁、焦虑或生活质量评分方面没有差异。
HF 死亡率高的患者经常高估自己的预期寿命。在不影响生活质量的情况下,通过专注的、由社会工作者主导的姑息治疗干预措施,可以增强预后的理解和患者与医生之间关于目标关怀的沟通,该干预措施始于医院,并在门诊环境中继续进行。
clinicaltrials.gov 标识符:NCT02805712。