Evaluating the Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinic: A Qualitative Assessment.
Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may improve care for patients with heart failure. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) is a patient survey that captures symptom frequency, symptom burden, physical limitations, social limitations, and quality of life. Despite the utility of PROs and the KCCQ-12, the implementation and routine use of these measures can be difficult. We conducted an evaluation of clinician perceptions of the KCCQ-12 to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation into clinical practice.We conducted interviews with cardiologists from 4 institutions across the United States and Canada (n=16) and observed clinic visits at 1 institution in Northern California (n=5). Qualitative analysis was conducted in 2 rounds: (1) rapid analysis constructed around major themes related to the aims of the study and (2) content analysis with codes derived from the rapid analysis and implementation science.Most heart failure physicians and advanced practice clinicians reported that the KCCQ-12 was acceptable, appropriate, and useful in clinical care. Clinician engagement efforts, trialability, and the straightforward design of the KCCQ-12 facilitated its use in clinical care. Further opportunities identified to facilitate implementation include more streamlined integration into the electronic health record and comprehensive staff education on PROs. Participants highlighted that the KCCQ-12 was useful in clinic visits to improve the consistency of patient history taking, focus patient-clinician conversations, collect a more accurate account of patient quality of life, track trends in patient well-being over time, and refine clinical decision-making.In this qualitative study, clinicians reported that the KCCQ-12 enhanced several aspects of heart failure patient care. Use of the KCCQ-12 was facilitated by a robust clinician engagement campaign and the design of the KCCQ-12 itself. Future implementation of PROs in heart failure clinic should focus on streamlining electronic health record integration and providing additional staff education on the value of PROs.URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04164004.
View details for DOI 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.122.009677
View details for PubMedID 37114990
Predictors of Incident HeartFailure Diagnosis Setting: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.
JACC. Heart failure
BACKGROUND: Early recognition of heart failure (HF) can reduce morbidity, yet HF is often diagnosed only after symptoms require urgent treatment.OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to describe predictors of HF diagnosis in the acute care vs outpatient setting within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).METHODS: The authors estimated whether incident HF diagnoses occurred in acute care (inpatient hospital or emergency department) vs outpatient settings within the VHA between 2014 and 2019. After excluding new-onset HF potentially caused by acute concurrent conditions, they identified sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with diagnosis setting and assessed variation across 130 VHA facilities using multivariable regression analysis.RESULTS: The authors identified 303,632 patients with new HF, with 160,454 (52.8%) diagnosed in acute care settings. In the prior year, 44% had HF symptoms and 11% had a natriuretic peptide tested, 88% of which were elevated. Patients with housing insecurity and high neighborhood social vulnerability had higher odds of acute care diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio: 1.22 [95%CI: 1.17-1.27] and 1.17 [95%CI: 1.14-1.21], respectively) adjusting for medical comorbidities. Better outpatient quality of care (blood pressure control and cholesterol and diabetes monitoring within the prior 2 years) predicted a lower odds of acute care diagnosis. Likelihood of acute care HF diagnosis varied from 41% to 68% across facilities after adjusting for patient-level risk factors.CONCLUSIONS: Many first HF diagnoses occur in the acute care setting, especially among socioeconomically vulnerable populations. Better outpatient care was associated with lower rates of an acute care diagnosis. These findings highlight opportunities for timelier HF diagnosis that may improve patient outcomes.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2022.11.013
View details for PubMedID 36881392
Disparities in Adoption of New Diabetic Therapies with Cardiovascular Benefits.
Diabetes research and clinical practice
Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists (GLP1a) have cardiovascular benefit, but adoption into clinical practice has been lagging. We aim to evaluate use of SGLT2i and GLP1a across socioeconomic strata (SES), medical risk as well as provider type.We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the prescription of SGLT2i or GLP1a within 12 months of clinic visit between January 1, 2018 and January 1, 2019 using de-identified claims data. The primary outcome was the composite of a medication fill of either an SGLT2i and/or GLP1a within 180 days of the index visit.Of the total cohort, 125,636 (15.8%) received either a GLP-1a or SGLT2i.The odds of prescription of either medication was 0.64 [p=0.006)] in patients with heart failure. Patients who identified as Black, Hispanic or Asian had lower odds of the primary outcome [Black: (AOR 0.81, p<0.000); Hispanic: (AOR 0.87, p<0.000); Asian: (AOR 0.83, p<0.000). The odds was higher for those treated by an endocrinologist versus primary care clinician [AOR 2.12, p<0.000)].Prescriptionof SGLT2i or GLP1a was lower among patients with cardiovascular co-morbidities and those who identified as Black, Hispanic or Asian. Further efforts to minimize these disparities should be pursued.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.diabres.2022.110233
View details for PubMedID 36581144
Early Results of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic (PRO-HF) Trial
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. 2022: E572
View details for Web of Science ID 000928164500017
Impact of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic on Clinician Health Status Assessment and Patient Experience: A Sub-Study of the PRO-HF Trial.
Circulation. Heart failure
Background: Clinicians typically estimate heart failure (HF) health status using the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, which is often discordant with patient-reported health status. It is unknown if collecting patient-reported health status improves the accuracy of clinician assessments. Methods: The Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinic (PRO-HF) trial is a randomized, non-blinded trial evaluating routine Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) collection in HF clinic. Patients with a scheduled visit to Stanford HF clinic between August 30, 2021, and June 30, 2022 were enrolled and randomized to KCCQ-12 assessment or usual care. In this prespecified sub-study, we evaluated whether access to the KCCQ-12 improved the accuracy of clinicians' NYHA assessment or patients' perspectives on their clinician interaction. We surveyed clinicians regarding their patients' NYHA class, quality of life, and symptom frequency. Clinician responses were compared with patients' KCCQ-12 responses. We surveyed patients regarding their clinician interactions. Results: Of the 1,248 enrolled patients, 1,051 (84.2%) attended a visit during the sub-study. KCCQ-12 results were given to the clinicians treating the 528 patients in the KCCQ-12 arm; the 523 patients in the usual care arm completed the KCCQ-12 without the results being shared. The correlation between NYHA class and KCCQ-12 Overall Summary Score was stronger when clinicians had access to the KCCQ-12 (r=-0.73 vs. r=-0.61, p<0.001). More patients in the KCCQ-12 arm strongly agreed that their clinician understood their symptoms (95.2% vs. 89.7% of respondents; [OR 2.27; 95% CI: 1.32-3.87)]. However, patients in both arms reported similar quality of clinician communication and therapeutic alliance. Conclusions: Collecting the KCCQ-12 in HF clinic improved clinicians' accuracy of health status assessment; correspondingly, patients believed their clinicians better understood their symptoms. Registration: URL: ClinicalTrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT04164004.
View details for DOI 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.122.010280
View details for PubMedID 36334312
The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Heart Failure Clinic Trial: Rationale and Methods of The PRO-HF Trial.
American heart journal
BACKGROUND: Among patients with heart failure (HF), patient-reported health status provides information beyond standard clinician assessment. Although HF management guidelines recommend collecting patient-reported health status as part of routine care, there is minimal data on the impact of this intervention.STUDY DESIGN: The Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure Clinic (PRO-HF) trial is a pragmatic, randomized, implementation-effectiveness trial testing the hypothesis that routine health status assessment via the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) leads to an improvement in patient-reported health status among patients treated in a tertiary health system HF clinic. PRO-HF has completed randomization of 1,248 participants to routine KCCQ-12 assessment or usual care. Patients randomized to the KCCQ-12 arm complete KCCQ-12 assessments before each HF clinic visit with the results shared with their treating clinician. Clinicians received education regarding the interpretation and potential utility of the KCCQ-12. The primary endpoint is the change in KCCQ-12 over 1 year. Secondary outcomes are HF therapy patterns and healthcare utilization, including clinic visits, testing, hospitalizations, and emergency department (ED) visits. As a sub-study, PRO-HF also evaluated the impact of routine KCCQ-12 assessment on patient experience and the accuracy of clinician-assessed health status. In addition, clinicians completed semi-structured interviews to capture their perceptions on the trial's implementation of routine KCCQ-12 assessment in clinical practice.CONCLUSIONS: PRO-HF is a pragmatic, randomized trial based in a real-world HF clinic to determine the feasibility of routinely assessing patient-reported health status and the impact of this intervention on health status, care delivery, patient experience, and the accuracy of clinician health status assessment.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ahj.2022.10.081
View details for PubMedID 36309127