Cardiogenic shock related cardiovascular disease mortality trends in US population: Heart failure vs. acute myocardial infarction as contributing causes.

BACKGROUND: Observational and trial data have revealed significant improvement in cardiogenic shock (CS) mortality due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after introducing early coronary revascularization. Less is known about CS mortality due to heart failure (HF), which is increasingly recognized as a distinct entity from AMI-CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this nationwide observational study, the CDC WONDER database was used to identify national trends in age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) due to CS (HF vs. AMI related) per 100,000 people aged 35-84. AAMR from AMI-CS decreased significantly from 1999 to 2009 (AAPC: -6.9% [95%CI -7.7, -6.1]) then stabilized from 2009 to 2020. By contrast, HF-CS associated AAMR rose steadily from 2009 to 2020 (AAPC: 13.3% [95%CI 11.4,15.2]). The mortality rate was almost twice as high in males compared to females in both AMI-CS and HF-CS throughout the study period. HF-CS mortality in the non-Hispanic Black population is increasing more quickly than that of the non-Hispanic White population (AAMR in 2020: 4.40 vs. 1.97 in 100,000). The AMI-CS mortality rate has been consistently higher in rural than urban areas (30% higher in 1999 and 28% higher in 2020). CONCLUSIONS: These trends highlight the fact that HF-CS and AMI-CS represent distinct clinical entities. While mortality associated with AMI-CS has primarily declined over the last two decades, the mortality related to HF-CS has increased significantly, particularly over the last decade, and is increasing rapidly among individuals younger than 65. Accordingly, a dramatic change in the demographics of CS patients in modern intensive care units is expected.

Challenges Facing Heart Failure Patients With Limited English Proficiency: A Qualitative Analysis Leveraging Interpreters' Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Limited English proficiency (LEP) heart failure (HF) patients experience worse HF outcomes, including higher readmission rates and emergency department visits. To elucidate the challenges this population faces, the authors interviewed interpreters to identify gaps in care quality and ways to improve care for LEP HF patients. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to understand the challenges facing HF patients with LEP using medical interpreters' perspectives. METHODS: The authors conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with interpreters working at an academic medical center. All interpreters employed by the medical center were eligible to participate. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The authors interviewed 20 interpreters from 9 languages (mean age: 48 ± 14.3 years; mean experience: 16.3 ± 10.6 years). Two themes regarding the challenges of care delivery to LEP HF patients emerged: 1) LEP patients often had a limited understanding of HF etiology, prognosis, and treatment options, and interpreters cited difficulty explaining HF given the complexity of the subject; and 2) practical steps to improve the discharge process for LEP HF patients. Integrating interpreters into both the inpatient and outpatient HF teams was a strongly supported intervention. Additionally, conducting pre-encounter huddles, providing the interpreter service phone number at the time of discharge, involving family members when appropriate, and considering nutrition referrals were all important steps highlighted by interpreters. CONCLUSIONS: This study illuminates challenges that LEP HF patients face and provides potential solutions to improve care for this vulnerable group. Integrating interpreters as part of the HF team and designing practical discharge plans for LEP HF patients could reduce current disparities.