Kathleen L. Grady

Team Management of Patients With Heart Failure A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the Cardiovascular Nursing Council of the American Heart Association

Heart failure is estimated to affect 4 to 5 million Americans, with 550 000 new cases reported annually.1 In the past 3 decades, both the incidence and prevalence of heart failure have increased.1 2 3 Factors that have contributed to this increase are the aging US population and improved survival rates in patients with cardiovascular disease due to advancements in diagnostic techniques and medical and surgical therapies.2 4 5 6 Heart failure is a chronic, progressive disease that is characterized by frequent hospital admissions and ultimately high mortality rates. Because of its high medical resource consumption, heart failure is the most costly cardiovascular illness in the United States.7 Advances in the treatment of heart failure and early intervention to prevent decompensation may delay disease progression and improve survival. After initial evaluation, further diagnostic testing, and implementation of standard medical therapy, outpatient management strategies focus on maintenance of patient stability. Patient counseling/education, promotion of compliance, and discharge planning may further contribute to clinical stability and improved patient outcomes. A variety of outpatient heart failure management programs have been implemented during the past decade. These programs may also contribute to improved heart failure patient outcomes, including decreased symptoms, improved quality of life, reduced rates of hospital admission, and decreased healthcare costs. The purpose of the present report was to examine current heart failure management strategies and programs and to provide recommendations regarding (1) the use of an integrated approach to care through systematic assessment and management, (2) counseling and education of patients, (3) promotion of patient compliance with the treatment regimen, and (4) facilitation of hospital discharge/implementation of outpatient models of healthcare delivery. ### Pathophysiology and Definition of Heart Failure The syndrome of heart failure is a result of complex interactions among molecular, endocrine, and biodynamic systems. There are several pathophysiological mechanisms that are involved …

Are preoperative obesity and cachexia risk factors for post heart transplant morbidity and mortality: a multi-institutional study of preoperative weight-height indices

BACKGROUND The relationship between pre-transplant body weight and post-transplant outcome has only recently been identified using a single, indirect measure of weight (percent ideal body weight [PIBW]). The literature is equivocal regarding which index is the better indicator of body weight. The purpose of this study was to determine (1) if pre-heart transplant body weight, measured by body mass index (BMI) and PIBW, is associated with post-heart transplant morbidity and mortality and (2) if patient gender, age, and etiology of heart disease affect this association. METHODS The sample included 4,515 patients who received a heart transplant from January 1, 1990-December 31, 1995 at 38 institutions participating in the Cardiac Transplant Research Database (CTRD). Patients were divided into groups according to their BMI and PIBW. Data were described using frequencies, measures of central tendency, Pearson correlation coefficients, stratified actuarial analyses and log rank tests for comparisons, and a multivariable risk factor analysis in the hazard domain. RESULTS For all patients (n = 4,515), being <80% or >140% of IBW before heart transplant was a risk factor for increased mortality after heart transplant. The association between pre-heart transplant PIBW and post-heart transplant survival was affected by gender, age, and etiology of heart disease. In males, a higher PIBW was a significant risk factor for death early after transplant (p = .0003). Although not significant, there was a trend for a higher PIBW being a risk factor for death in females throughout the post transplant period (p = .07). No differences in cause of death were found for PIBW and BMI. In male and female recipients <55 years, being overweight pre-heart transplant was a risk factor for infection. In patients with pre-transplant ischemic heart disease, the greatest risk for infection was found in patients who were >140% of IBW. Pre-heart transplant BMI and PIBW were not associated with acute rejection or cardiac allograft arteriopathy after transplant. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, being cachectic or obese preoperatively is associated with decreased survival in all patients after heart transplantation. Being obese preoperatively is associated with increased infection after heart transplant in males and females <55 years and in patients with ischemic heart disease. Of the 2 indices of body weight used in this study, percent ideal body weight appears to be the better predictor of future morbidity and mortality following heart transplantation.

Predictors of quality of life in patients at one year after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND A multivariate approach to the study of relationships between quality of life and demographic, physical, and psychosocial variables after heart transplantation has not been examined in a large, multi-site sample. The purpose of this study was to describe quality of life, examine relationships between quality of life and demographic, physical, and psychosocial variables, and identify predictors of quality of life in patients who were 1 year post heart transplantation. METHODS Data were collected from a nonrandom sample of adult patients (n = 232) who were 1 year post heart transplantation at a Midwestern or Southern medical center. Nine self-administered instruments and chart review were used to gather data from patients. All tools had adequate psychometric support. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, and step-wise multiple regression were used to analyze data. Level of significance was set at 0.05. RESULTS Patients were most satisfied with the areas of quality of life regarding social interaction and least satisfied with their psychological state. Patients experienced an average amount of stress, were coping fairly well, reported overall good quality of life, and were very satisfied with the outcome of their transplant surgery. Nine out of 16 variables were significant predictors of quality of life and explained 66% of the variance in quality of life: less stress, more helpfulness of information from health care providers, better health perception, better compliance with the transplant regimen, more effective coping, less functional disability, less symptom distress, older age, and fewer complications. CONCLUSIONS Predictors of quality of life at 1 year after heart transplantation were primarily psychological. Additional variance in quality of life was explained by physical, somatic sensation, demographic, and health status variables. Knowledge of these factors provides (1) information to identify patients who are at risk for poor quality of life at 1 year after heart transplantation and (2) direction for the development of interventions to improve quality of life.

Stressors in Patients Awaiting a Heart Transplant

The authors identify 39 common preoperative stressors found in 175 heart transplant candidates from two medical centers. Relevance of the 10 worst and 10 least stressors during the preop wait is discussed. The 10 worst stressors were finding out about the need for a transplant, having end-stage heart disease, family worrying, illness symptoms, waiting for a donor, uncertainty about the future, no energy for leisure activities, constantly feeling worn out, less control over life, and dependency on others. The impact of transplant waiting time on the perceived stressfulness of illness factors is also examined. One factor was more stressful for those waiting longer than the median time of 1 month; 16 factors were more stressful for those waiting less than 1 month. The novelty or familiarity of the factor seemed to influence the stressfulness ratings of many variables during the period of waiting for the transplant.

Improvement in quality of life outcomes 2 weeks after left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND The successful use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as a bridge to heart transplantation has prompted our examination of quality of life (QOL) outcomes. The purposes of this study are to describe QOL in patients 1 to 2 weeks after LVAD implantation and to compare QOL in a smaller cohort of patients from before to 1 to 2 weeks after surgery. METHODS Data were collected from a convenience sample of 81 patients who completed booklets of questionnaires that measure domains of QOL 1 to 2 weeks after LVAD insertion and from 30 of 81 patients who completed booklets at both the pre-implantation and post-implantation periods. Patients completed booklets of 6 to 8 self-reporting instruments, with acceptable reliability and validity. Data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics (chi-square, Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests) with p = 0.01 considered statistically significant. RESULTS One to 2 weeks after LVAD implantation, patients were quite satisfied with their lives, experienced moderately low amounts of stress, coped well, and perceived themselves as having good health and QOL, low symptom distress, and moderately low functional disability. Patients reported significantly better QOL, more satisfaction with health and functioning, and were significantly less distressed by symptoms from immediately pre-operatively to post-operatively. However, patients reported significantly more self-care disability and more dissatisfaction with socioeconomic areas of life from before to immediately after surgery. Psychological distress was low and did not change with time. CONCLUSION Given that QOL improved from before to after LVAD implantation, our findings provide a springboard for investigation of the impact of LVADs on long-term QOL outcomes.

Change in Quality of Life from Before to After Discharge Following Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

BACKGROUND Quality of life (QOL) outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation from before to after hospital discharge have been examined only in a very small sample of patients. The purposes of this study are to describe change in QOL from before to after hospital discharge in LVAD patients and to determine whether being discharged with an LVAD predicts better QOL than being hospitalized with an LVAD. METHODS A non-random sample of 62 LVAD patients (approximately 50 years old, male, white, married, fairly well-educated) completed self-report questionnaires at >or=2 timepoints post-implant. The questionnaires (Quality of Life Index, Rating Question Form, Heart Failure Symptom Checklist, Sickness Impact Profile, LVAD Stressor Scale, Jalowiec Coping Scale), which were collated into booklets, had acceptable reliability and validity. Longitudinal analyses were performed in 2 steps using 1-sample t-tests and linear mixed effects modeling. RESULTS Perception of QOL and health status were fairly good both before and after discharge of LVAD patients. Discharge predicted increased satisfaction with socioeconomic areas of life; decreased overall and psychologic stress and stress related to family and friends, self-care and work/school/finances; and decreased physical and self-care disability. CONCLUSIONS QOL outcomes improved from before to after hospital discharge in LVAD patients awaiting heart transplantation. As LVADs potentially become available as destination therapy, in addition to being successful bridges to heart transplantation, QOL outcomes will become more important to study.

Change in quality of life from after left ventricular assist device implantation to after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND No studies have analyzed quality of life (QOL) from before to after heart transplantation in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Therefore, the purpose of this longitudinal, multi-site study was to compare QOL outcomes of patients listed for heart transplantation who required a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) at 3 months after implantation of an LVAD vs 3 months after heart transplantation. METHODS A non-random sample of 40 patients (predominantly middle-aged, married, white men), who had paired data at both 3 months after LVAD implantation and 3 months after heart transplantation, were investigated. Patients completed self-report questionnaires (with acceptable reliability and validity) at both time periods, including the Quality of Life Index, Rating Question Form, Heart Failure Symptom Checklist, Sickness Impact Profile, LVAD Stressor Scale (completed only after LVAD implant), Heart Transplant Stressor Scale (completed only after heart transplant) and Jalowiec Coping Scale. Descriptive analyses and comparative analyses using paired t-tests were performed with statistical significance set at 0.01. RESULTS Patients were significantly more satisfied with their lives overall and with their health and functioning at 3 months after heart transplantation as compared with 3 months after LVAD implantation. Mobility, self-care ability, physical ability and overall functional ability improved from 3 months after LVAD implant to 3 months after heart transplant. There was significantly less symptom distress after LVAD implant as compared with after heart transplant for the neurologic, dermatologic and physical sub-scales. Work/school/financial stress was significantly lower after heart transplant vs after LVAD implant. In contrast, 2 other areas of stress were significantly lower after LVAD implant vs after heart transplant: self-care stress and hospital/clinic-related stress. CONCLUSIONS Differences were found in QOL outcomes at 3 months after LVAD implant as compared with 3 months after heart transplant. Our findings point out specific areas of concern with respect to QOL after LVAD implant and post-transplant, some of which are amenable to health-care provider interventions.

Quality of life after heart transplantation: are things really better?

Studies of quality of life (QOL) in heart transplant recipients have been published during the last 2 decades. More recent studies of QOL outcomes have built on previous research. Relationships between posttransplant complications and QOL, longitudinal studies of intermediate and long-term QOL, QOL in patients awaiting transplant (bridged to transplant with a left ventricular assist device), and intervention studies to improve QOL have been published recently. Is QOL better from before to after heart transplantation? The current body of literature suggests that QOL is better overall. However, change in QOL (both positive and negative) is variable based on demographic characteristics, clinical problems, QOL domain, time posttransplant, and other life events. Moreover, although more recent reports have begun to examine unanswered questions, much work remains to be done. Future studies need to be scientifically rigorous, using definitions of QOL with identification of domains to be studied; prospective, multisite, longitudinal study designs; large sample sizes; reliable and valid instruments; and appropriate statistical techniques. As changes in QOL outcomes and risks for poor QOL outcomes are identified, more intervention studies need to be developed to assist patients toward better QOL.

State of the science for cardiovascular nursing outcomes: Heart failure

The incidence of heart failure is increasing because of the progressive aging of the population and improved survival from cardiovascular disease. This article synthesizes the state of the science of nurse sensitive outcomes in heart failure treated medically or surgically and provides recommendations for building the science. Outcomes studied include mortality, morbidity, resource use, quality of life, symptoms, physical function, return to work, and self-care and compliance behavior. Gaps in the literature are identified and recommendations for future research are provided.

Preoperative psychosocial predictors of hospital length of stay after heart transplantation.

The effect of psychosocial factors on hospital length of stay (LOS) after heart transplantation has not been reported. This study examines relationships between preoperative psychosocial variables and LOS and identifies preoperative psychosocial predictors of LOS after transplant. A nonrandom sample of 307 patients at two medical centers completed a self-administered booklet of psychosocial measures. A chart review was also conducted. Psychosocial problems included anxiety, stress, and inadequate coping; questionable understanding of heart failure and treatment; substance abuse; and noncompliance. Self-care disability, a history of noncompliance, and more emotional disability predicted 8% of LOS. This supports the inclusion of psychosocial issues and functional disability in post-heart transplant clinical pathways.