Understanding help-seeking decisions in people with heart failure: a qualitative systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the process of help-seeking among heart failure patients from the perspectives of patients, caregivers and health professionals. DESIGN: Systematic review using qualitative meta-synthesis. METHODS: A systematic search (20th May 2011) was conducted to identify studies published in English as full papers ≥1995 reporting primary qualitative data with extractable heart failure-specific data or themes related to help-seeking in patients, caregivers or health professionals. Databases searched were: CINAHL, Medline, PsycInfo, Social Science Citation Index, Embase, Social policy/Practice, SocIndex, Ageline, Health Source Nursing, Scopus; additionally, we consulted with experts and manually searched references. RESULTS: 58 studies (990 patients; 274 female, 527 male, 189 sex not described; 229 caregivers, 79 health professionals) were included. Heart failure help-seeking was embedded in daily experiences of heart failure but ongoing symptoms were confusing, ambiguous and disruptive; little support was available from professionals to interpret the presence and significance of fluctuations in symptoms for help-seeking. Other significant barriers to help-seeking were: avoidance-based coping, fear of hospitals and misplaced reluctance to be burdensome. Help-seeking was facilitated by good involvement and frank communication between patients, caregivers and health professionals and the presence of a sense of elevated personal risk. CONCLUSION: Health services should harness primary care providers and support patients and caregivers to prioritize development of objective symptom monitoring skills, recognize and personally assimilate the elevated risks of heart failure and help-seeking delays and discourage avoidance-based coping and unwarranted concerns that downplay the significance of heart failure and urgency to address symptoms.

A meta-review of evidence on heart failure disease management programs: the challenges of describing and synthesizing evidence on complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Despite favourable results from past meta-analyses, some recent large trials have not found heart failure (HF) disease management programs to be beneficial. To explore reasons for this, we evaluated evidence from existing meta-analyses. METHODS: Systematic review incorporating meta-review was used. We selected meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials published after 1995 in English that examined the effects of HF disease management programs on key outcomes. Databases searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), DARE, NHS EED, NHS HTA, Ageline, AMED, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL; cited references, experts and existing reviews were also searched. RESULTS: 15 meta-analyses were identified containing a mean of 18.5 randomized trials of HF interventions +/- 10.1 (range: 6 to 36). Overall quality of the meta-analyses was very mixed (Mean AMSTAR Score = 6.4 +/- 1.9; range 2-9). Reporting inadequacies were widespread around populations, intervention components, settings and characteristics, comparison, and comparator groups. Heterogeneity (statistical, clinical, and methodological) was not taken into account sufficiently when drawing conclusions from pooled analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analyses of heart failure disease management programs have promising findings but often fail to report key characteristics of populations, interventions, and comparisons. Existing reviews are of mixed quality and do not adequately take account of program complexity and heterogeneity.

What is the strength of evidence for heart failure disease-management programs?

Heart failure (HF) disease-management programs are increasingly common. However, some large and recent trials of programs have not reported positive findings. There have also been parallel recent advances in reporting standards and theory around complex nonpharmacological interventions. These developments compel reconsideration in this Viewpoint of how research into HF-management programs should be evaluated, the quality, specificity, and usefulness of this evidence, and the recommendations for future research. Addressing the main determinants of intervention effectiveness by using the PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) approach and the recent CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement on nonpharmacological trials, we will argue that in both current trials and meta-analyses, interventions and comparisons are not sufficiently well described; that complex programs have been excessively oversimplified; and that potentially salient differences in programs, populations, and settings are not incorporated into analyses. In preference to more general meta-analyses of programs, adequate descriptions are first needed of populations, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes in past and future trials. This could be achieved via a systematic survey of study authors based on the CONSORT statement. These more detailed data on studies should be incorporated into future meta-analyses of comparable trials and used with other techniques such as patient-based outcomes data and meta-regression. Although trials and meta-analyses continue to have potential to generate useful evidence, a more specific evidence base is needed to support the development of effective programs for different populations and settings.

The potential of nursing to reduce the burden of heart failure in rural Canada: what strategies should nurses prioritize?

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is an increasingly common condition in high-income countries that has a large and negative impact on life quality and expectancy, and is associated with high financial costs. In Canada, CHF has an especially large impact on rural settings because of the higher proportion of older adults (aged >65 years) in these settings, and because care and outcomes tend to be more adverse in rural parts of the country compared to urban settings. Much can be done to reduce these burdens in terms of pharmacological, behavioural and health service strategies. However, rural patients tend to have worse care and outcomes than urban patients. Realizing the benefits of these strategies in Canada's rural settings requires consideration of underlying reasons for poor care and outcomes. We propose the main reasons for adverse outcomes are related to the nature of CHF and the combined influence of demographics, health services and the rural context. Nurses remain under-used in CHF management in Canada and can play a vital and influential role in reducing the burden of CHF in rural settings. To increase and improve nurses' roles, we recommend that nurses should support the development and adaptation of disease management programs in rural settings and promote the centrality of nursing in these programs. Nurses in or working with rural settings should seek to support and use tele-health technologies effectively and provide better support to lay caregivers. It will also be vital to increase the nursing capacity regarding specialist roles for CHF management.