Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38775053›Full record

ArticleCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2024

Prognosis Communication in Heart Failure: Experiences and Preferences of End-Stage Heart Failure Patients and Care Partners.

Supriya Shore, Molly Harrod, Ann Vitous, Maria J Silveira, Colleen K McIlvennan, Thomas M Cascino, Kenneth M Langa, P Michael Ho, Brahmajee K Nallamothu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Supriya ShoreDivision of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Internal Medicine (S.S., T.C., B.K.N.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0002-5436-6097
Molly HarrodCenter for Clinical Management Research (M.H.), VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, MI.ORCID 0000-0001-5080-7249
Ann VitousGeriatric Research and Clinical Center (A.V.), VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, MI.
Maria J SilveiraDivision of Geriatric and Palliative Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (M.J.S.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Colleen K McIlvennanDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora (C.K.M.I., P.M.H.).ORCID 0000-0003-2131-9910
Thomas M CascinoDivision of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Internal Medicine (S.S., T.C., B.K.N.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0003-3779-0790
Kenneth M LangaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute for Social Research (K.M.L.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
P Michael HoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora (C.K.M.I., P.M.H.).ORCID 0000-0002-7775-6266
Brahmajee K NallamothuDivision of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Internal Medicine (S.S., T.C., B.K.N.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.ORCID 0000-0003-4331-6649

Funding

American Heart Association-American Stroke Association 855105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with heart failure (HF) overestimate survival compared with model-predicted estimates, but the reasons for this discrepancy are poorly understood. We characterized how patients with end-stage HF and their care partners understand prognosis and elicited their preferences around prognosis communication.

methodsWe conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with patients with end-stage HF and their care partners between 2021 and 2022 at a tertiary care center in Michigan. Participants were asked to describe barriers they faced to understanding prognosis. All interviews were coded and analyzed using an iterative content analysis approach.

resultsFifteen patients with end-stage HF and 15 care partners participated, including 7 dyads. The median patient age was 66.5 years (range, 31-80) and included 9 of 15 (60%) White participants and 9 of 15 (60%) were males. Care partners included 10 of 15 (67%) White participants and 6 of 15 (40%) were males. Care partners were partners (n=7, 47%), siblings (n=4, 27%), parents (n=2, 13%), and children (n=2, 13%). Most patients demonstrated a poor understanding of their prognosis. In contrast, care partners commonly identified the patient's rapidly declining trajectory. Patients and care partners described ineffective prognosis communication with clinicians, common barriers to understanding prognosis, and similar suggestions on improving prognosis communication. Barriers to understanding prognosis included (1) conversation avoidance by physicians, (2) information inconsistency across different physicians, (3) distractions during prognosis communication due to emphasis on other conditions, and (4) confusion related to the use of medical jargon. Most patients and care partners wanted discussions around prognosis to begin early in the course of the disease, repeated routinely using layperson's terms, incorporating both quality of life and survival assessments, and involving care partners. Both patients and care partners did not expect precise survival estimates.

conclusionsPatients with end-stage HF demonstrate a poor understanding of their prognosis compared with their care partners. Patients and care partners are open to discussing prognosis early, using direct and patient-centered language.

Indexed as

CaregiversHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHeart FailureInterviews as TopicPatient PreferenceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCommunicationComprehensionFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMichiganMiddle Agedcaregiverscommunicationheart failurephysiciansprognosis

Identifiers

PMID38775053
PMCPMC11328965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.