Estevan D. Delgado

Ventricular assist devices: a review of psychosocial risk factors and their impact on outcomes.

BACKGROUND Psychosocial contraindications for ventricular assist devices (VADs) remain particularly nebulous and are driven by institution-specific practices. Our multi-institutional, multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a review with the goal of addressing the following research question: How are preoperative psychosocial domains predictive of or associated with postoperative VAD-related outcomes? Answers to this question could contribute to the development of treatment-specific (contra) indications for patients under consideration for mechanical devices. METHODS AND RESULTS We identified 5 studies that examined psychosocial factors and their relationship to postoperative VAD-related outcomes. Our results suggest that 3 psychosocial variables are possibly associated with VAD-related outcomes: depression, functional status, and self-care. Of the few studies that exist, the generalizability of findings is constrained by a lack of methodologic rigor, inconsistent terminology, and a lack of conceptual clarity. CONCLUSIONS This review should serve as a call for research. Efforts to minimize psychosocial risk before device placement can only be successful insofar as VAD programs can clearly identify who is at risk for suboptimal outcomes.

Barriers and Facilitators to Initiating and Completing Time-Limited Trials in Critical Care.

Objectives:A time-limited trial is an agreement between clinicians and patients or surrogate decision makers to use medical therapies over a defined period of time to see if the patient improves or deteriorates according to agreed-upon clinical milestones. Although time-limited trials are broadly advocated, there is little empirical evidence of the benefits and risks of time-limited trials, when they are initiated, when and why they succeed or fail, and what facilitates completion of them. Our study objectives were to 1) identify the purposes for which clinicians use time-limited trials and 2) identify barriers and facilitators to initiating and completing time-limited trials. Design:Semistructured interviews: We analyzed interviews using qualitative description with constant comparative techniques. Setting:Nine hundred-bed, academic, tertiary hospital in Houston, Texas. Interviewees were from open medical, surgical, neurosurgical, and cardiovascular ICUs. Subjects:Thirty healthcare professionals were interviewed (nine surgeons, 16 intensivists, three nurse practitioners, and two “other” clinicians). Interventions:None. Measurements and Main Results:Interviewees reported initiating time-limited trials for three different purposes: to prepare surrogates and clinicians for discussion and possible shifts toward comfort-care only therapies, build consensus, and refine prognostic information. The main barriers to initiating time-limited trials involve clinicians’ or surrogate decision makers’ disagreement on setting a time limit. Barriers to completing time-limited trials include 1) requesting more time; 2) communication breakdowns because of rotating call schedules; and 3) changes in clinical course. Finally, facilitators to completing time-limited trials include 1) having defined goals about what could be achieved during an ICU stay, either framed in narrow, numeric terms or broad goals focusing on achievable activities of daily living; 2) applying time-limited trials in certain types of cases; and 3) taking ownership to ensure completion of the trial. Conclusions:An understanding of barriers and facilitators to initiating and completing time-limited trials is an essential first step toward appropriate utilization of time-limited trials in the ICUs, as well as developing educational or communication interventions with clinicians to facilitate time-limited trial use. We provide practical suggestions on patient populations in whom time-limited trials may be successful, the setting, and clinicians likely to benefit from educational interventions, allowing clinicians to have a fuller sense of when and how to use time-limited trials.

Content Analysis of Social Media Related to Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Background—Social media have the potential to offer important benefits for patient education, support, and shared decision making. Despite the proliferation of social media use during the past decade, little is known about the scope and quality of available information, or the purposes that social media sites serve for patient decisional and support needs. Methods and Results—We conducted a mixed method study, including content analysis of social media and principal components analysis analysis of data sites discussing left ventricular assist device treatment for heart failure. This study explored aspects of interactivity, user-friendliness, appeal, medium, purpose, audience, and accuracy of information. Higher levels of interactivity (eg, posting comments) seem to enhance the appeal and usability of available information but also introduce greater potential for inaccuracy and inconsistency. The current lack of oversight into the content and quality of available information constitute a challenge for the reliable use of social media as forums for information-seeking and social network–based support. Conclusions—We conclude that social media outlets constitute a promising source of informational and psychosocial support for patients, caregivers, and candidates, and if used in conjunction with patient-provider dialog, can contribute to informed decision making by facilitating reflection and discussion of personal concerns, values, and informational needs.