Effectiveness of palliative care interventions on patient-reported outcomes and all-cause mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 NURSING International Journal of Nursing Studies Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104887
{"title":"Effectiveness of palliative care interventions on patient-reported outcomes and all-cause mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Current evidence that supports palliative care interventions predominantly focuses on individuals with cancer or hospitalized patients. However, the effectiveness of palliative care on patient-reported outcomes and mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure has not been evaluated.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative care interventions on patient-reported outcomes and all-cause mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to October 2023. Randomized controlled trials were considered if they compared palliative care interventions with usual care, attention control, or waiting-list control primarily in a community-dwelling heart failure patient population. The primary outcome was patient-reported generic health-related or heart failure-specific quality of life. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported symptom burden, psychological health (anxiety and depression), spiritual well-being, and all-cause mortality. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved articles and extracted data from the included studies. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool the data, followed by sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression. All analyses were performed using R version 4.2.2.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eleven eligible studies were included in this review with a total of 1535 patients. Compared to usual care, palliative care interventions demonstrated statistically significant effects on improving generic health-related quality of life (SMD, 0.30 [95 % CI, 0.12 to 0.48]) and heart failure-specific quality of life (SMD, 0.17 [95 % CI, 0.03 to 0.31]). Palliative care interventions also reduced anxiety (SMD, −<!--> <!-->0.22 [95 % CI, −<!--> <!-->0.40 to −<!--> <!-->0.05]) and depression (SMD, −<!--> <!-->0.18 [95 % CI, −<!--> <!-->0.33 to −<!--> <!-->0.03]), and enhanced spiritual well-being (SMD, 0.43 [95 % CI, 0.05 to 0.81]), without adversely affecting all-cause mortality (RR, 1.00 [95 % CI, 0.76 to 1.33]). Yet, the interventions had no significant effects on symptom burden (SMD, −<!--> <!-->0.09 [95 % CI, −<!--> <!-->0.40 to 0.21]). The certainty of evidence across the outcomes ranged from very low to moderate based on the GRADE approach.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Palliative care interventions are beneficial for community-dwelling adults with heart failure in that the interventions improved patient-reported quality of life, psychological health, and spiritual well-being, and importantly, did not lead to higher mortality rates. Findings of this review support the implementation of palliative care for adults with heart failure in community settings.</p></div><div><h3>Registration</h3><p>CRD42023482495.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50299,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020748924002001","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Current evidence that supports palliative care interventions predominantly focuses on individuals with cancer or hospitalized patients. However, the effectiveness of palliative care on patient-reported outcomes and mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure has not been evaluated.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative care interventions on patient-reported outcomes and all-cause mortality in community-dwelling adults with heart failure.

Design

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception to October 2023. Randomized controlled trials were considered if they compared palliative care interventions with usual care, attention control, or waiting-list control primarily in a community-dwelling heart failure patient population. The primary outcome was patient-reported generic health-related or heart failure-specific quality of life. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported symptom burden, psychological health (anxiety and depression), spiritual well-being, and all-cause mortality. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved articles and extracted data from the included studies. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool the data, followed by sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression. All analyses were performed using R version 4.2.2.

Results

Eleven eligible studies were included in this review with a total of 1535 patients. Compared to usual care, palliative care interventions demonstrated statistically significant effects on improving generic health-related quality of life (SMD, 0.30 [95 % CI, 0.12 to 0.48]) and heart failure-specific quality of life (SMD, 0.17 [95 % CI, 0.03 to 0.31]). Palliative care interventions also reduced anxiety (SMD, − 0.22 [95 % CI, − 0.40 to − 0.05]) and depression (SMD, − 0.18 [95 % CI, − 0.33 to − 0.03]), and enhanced spiritual well-being (SMD, 0.43 [95 % CI, 0.05 to 0.81]), without adversely affecting all-cause mortality (RR, 1.00 [95 % CI, 0.76 to 1.33]). Yet, the interventions had no significant effects on symptom burden (SMD, − 0.09 [95 % CI, − 0.40 to 0.21]). The certainty of evidence across the outcomes ranged from very low to moderate based on the GRADE approach.

Conclusions

Palliative care interventions are beneficial for community-dwelling adults with heart failure in that the interventions improved patient-reported quality of life, psychological health, and spiritual well-being, and importantly, did not lead to higher mortality rates. Findings of this review support the implementation of palliative care for adults with heart failure in community settings.

Registration

CRD42023482495.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
姑息关怀干预对社区成人心力衰竭患者报告结果和全因死亡率的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景目前支持姑息关怀干预的证据主要集中在癌症患者或住院患者身上。我们旨在评估姑息关怀干预措施对社区成人心力衰竭患者的患者报告结果和全因死亡率的有效性。如果随机对照试验主要是在社区居住的心力衰竭患者群体中比较姑息治疗干预与常规治疗、注意力对照或等待名单对照,则被视为随机对照试验。主要结果为患者报告的一般健康相关或心衰特异性生活质量。次要结果是患者报告的症状负担、心理健康(焦虑和抑郁)、精神健康和全因死亡率。两位独立审稿人对检索到的文章进行了筛选,并从纳入的研究中提取了数据。进行随机效应荟萃分析以汇总数据,然后进行敏感性分析、亚组分析和元回归分析。所有分析均使用R版本4.2.2进行。结果本综述共纳入了7项符合条件的研究,共计1535名患者。与常规护理相比,姑息治疗干预对改善一般健康相关生活质量(SMD,0.30 [95 % CI,0.12 至 0.48])和心衰特异性生活质量(SMD,0.17 [95 % CI,0.03 至 0.31])具有统计学意义。姑息关怀干预措施还降低了焦虑(SMD,- 0.22 [95 % CI,- 0.40 至 - 0.05])和抑郁(SMD,- 0.18 [95 % CI,- 0.33 至 - 0.03]),提高了精神幸福感(SMD,0.43 [95 % CI,0.05 至 0.81]),但未对全因死亡率(RR,1.00 [95 % CI,0.76 至 1.33])产生不利影响。然而,干预措施对症状负担没有显著影响(SMD,- 0.09 [95 % CI,- 0.40 至 0.21])。根据 GRADE 方法,各结果的证据确定性从很低到中等不等。结论姑息关怀干预措施对社区居住的成人心力衰竭患者有益,因为这些干预措施改善了患者报告的生活质量、心理健康和精神健康,而且重要的是,并没有导致死亡率升高。本综述的研究结果支持在社区环境中对成年心力衰竭患者实施姑息关怀。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.00
自引率
2.50%
发文量
181
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Nursing Studies (IJNS) is a highly respected journal that has been publishing original peer-reviewed articles since 1963. It provides a forum for original research and scholarship about health care delivery, organisation, management, workforce, policy, and research methods relevant to nursing, midwifery, and other health related professions. The journal aims to support evidence informed policy and practice by publishing research, systematic and other scholarly reviews, critical discussion, and commentary of the highest standard. The IJNS is indexed in major databases including PubMed, Medline, Thomson Reuters - Science Citation Index, Scopus, Thomson Reuters - Social Science Citation Index, CINAHL, and the BNI (British Nursing Index).
期刊最新文献
Comparative effectiveness of multi-sensory interventions for reducing pain among premature infants: A systematic review and network meta-analysis Using nudges to promote health among older adults: A scoping review Family involvement in preventing delirium in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis Long-term patient outcomes from a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation programme with integrated nurse specialist support: A retrospective cohort study Effectiveness of a theory-underpinning exercise intervention among community-dwelling (pre)frail older adults: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1