ArticleInternational journal of community based nursing and midwifery2018
Agreement between Heart Failure Patients and Their Primary Caregivers on Symptom Assessment.
Article in International journal of community based nursing and midwifery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Status quo and factors influencing dyadic disease appraisal in chronic heart failure based on latent profile analysis in Northern Sichuan Province, China.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Person with Heart Failure and Care Partner Dyads: Current Knowledge, Challenges, and Future Directions: State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of cardiac failure · 2023Review
- SYMptoms in chronic heart failure imPACT on burden of treatment (SYMPACT): a cross-sectional survey.ESC heart failure · 2022Article
- Comparison of Prevalence and Risk Factors of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Different Ethnicity: A Cross-sectional Study.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2021Article
- Dark or Bright Half of the Moon: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Experience of Iranian Heart Failure Patients Regarding their Quality of Life.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo decrease the readmission rate of heart failure (HF) patients, patients and their caregivers (CGs) should participate in symptoms assessment. This study aimed to assess the agreement between HF patients and their CGs on symptoms assessment.
methodsUsing a correlational design, 100 HF patients with their CGs (100 dyads) were recruited from Department of Cardiology, Iranshahr, during August-December 2014. Data were collected using modified Heart Failure Symptom Survey (HFSS).Pearson and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to analyze the degree of agreement within HF dyads, using SPSS16. The level of significance was set at 0.05.
resultsThe most frequent and severe symptom assessed equally by partners was shortness of breath (SOB). Dyads had a good agreement on assessment of extremity swelling (r=0.87, P≤0.01, ICC=0.861 CI: 0.798-0.901), SOB at rest (r=0.83, P≤0.01, ICC=0.775, CI: 0.680-0.845), SOB with activity (r=0.81, P≤0.01, ICC=0.795 CI: 0.711-0.858), and feeling depressed (r=0.77, P≤0.01, ICC=0.769, CI: 0.675-0.838). 28.6% of HF dyad had a good, 50% had a moderate, and 21.4 % had a poor agreement in assessment of HF symptoms.
conclusionMost of the HF dyad members did not agree with each other on the assessment of symptoms. Knowledge, skills and ability of each dyad in HF symptoms assessment should be included in the patients' discharge planning and nurses must modify their misunderstanding or inability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29344539PMC5747576W2776609385What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.