Patient decision-making in left ventricular assist devices for destination therapy.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a common life-limiting disease. A destination therapy for people who will not have a heart transplant is a left ventricular assist device. AIMS: To discover how patients who have a left ventricular assist device for destination therapy make decisions about their healthcare after implantation of the device. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative design with semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 11 participants who are living with a left ventricular assist device for destination therapy. FINDINGS: People with a left ventricular assist device felt they had 'no choice' when making decisions about their healthcare. CONCLUSION: Engaging with patients to contemplate present and future healthcare decisions is a complex process that includes cognitive processes within the patient. Clinicians need to be aware that a gap may occur between what is said and what is heard in communication.

Impact of Population Differences: Post-Kidney Transplant Readmissions.

Early hospital readmissions after kidney transplantation are common and considered an indicator of healthcare quality. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe the risk factors for and causes of 30-day readmission post-kidney transplant for adults in a predominantly Hispanic Southern Texas population in comparison to the United States kidney transplant population and published research. A single-center, descriptive, retrospective study of adult kidney transplant recipients readmitted to a hospital in southern Texas was conducted. Results indicated that this population had lower education levels, a greater percentage of Spanish-speaking patients, and a high number of patients with either or both diabetes mellitus and hypertension, necessitating the development of additional methods of increasing understanding and adherence to restrictions, requirements, and medication regimes.

Quantity and Quality of Economic Evaluations in U.S. Nursing Research, 1997-2015: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The United States has a complex healthcare system that is undergoing substantial reformations. There is a need for high-quality, economic evaluations of nursing practice. An updated review of completed economic evaluations relevant to the field of nursing within the U.S. healthcare system is timely and needed. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and describe the quantity and quality of economic evaluations in nursing-relevant research performed in the United States between 1997 and 2015. METHODS: Four databases were searched. Titles, abstracts, and full-text content were reviewed to identify studies that analyzed both costs and outcomes, relevant to nursing, performed in the United States, and used the quality-adjusted life year to measure effectiveness. For included studies, data were extracted from full-text articles using criteria from U.S. Public Health Service's Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Most (n = 25, 89%) were published in the last decade of the analysis, from 2006 to 2015. Assessment of quality, based on selected items from the panel guidelines, found that the evaluations did not consistently use the recommended societal perspective, use multiple resource utilization categories, use constant dollars, discount future costs and outcomes, use a lifetime horizon, or include an indication of uncertainty in results. The only resource utilization category consistently included across studies was healthcare resources. DISCUSSION: Only 28 nursing-related studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified as meeting robust health economic evaluation methodological criteria, and most did not include all important guideline items. Despite increases in absolute numbers of published studies over the past decade, economic evaluation has been underutilized in U.S. nursing-relevant research in the past two decades.

Comparison of patient and partner quality of life and health outcomes in the first year after an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

Recovery following an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) impacts both the patient and partner, often in divergent ways. Patients may have had a cardiac arrest or cardiac arrhythmias, whereas partners may have to perform CPR and manage the ongoing challenges of heart disease therapy. Currently, support for post-ICD care focuses primarily on restoring patient functioning with few interventions available to partners who serve as primary support. This descriptive study examined and compared patterns of change for both patients and partners during the first year post-ICD implantation. For this longitudinal study, the sample included 42 of 55 (76.4 %) patient-partner dyads who participated in the 'usual care' group of a larger intervention RCT with patients following ICD implant for secondary prevention of cardiac arrest. Measures taken at across five time points (at hospital discharge and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months follow up) tracked physical function (SF-12 PCS, symptoms); psychological adjustment (SF-12 MCS; State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; CES-D); relationship impact (Family Functioning, DOII; Mutuality and Interpersonal Sensitivity, MIS); and healthcare utilization (ED visits, outpatient visits, hospitalizations). Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to characterize and compare outcome trends for patients and partners across the first 12 months of recovery. Patients were 66.5 ± 11.3 (mean + SD) years old, predominately Caucasian male (91 %), with Charlson co-morbidities of 4.4 ± 2.4. Partners were 62.5 ± 11.1 years old, predominantly female (91 %) with Charlson co-morbidities of 2.9 ± 3.0. Patient versus partner differences were observed in the pattern of physical health (F = 10.8, p < 0.0001); patient physical health improved while partner health showed few changes. For partners compared to patients, anxiety, depression, and illness demands on family functioning tended to be higher. Patient mutuality was stable, while partner mutuality increased steadily (F = 2.5, p = 0.05). Patient sensitivity was highest at discharge and declined; partner sensitivity increased (F = 10.2, p < 0.0001) across the 12-month recovery. Outpatient visits for patients versus partners differed (F = 5.0, p = 0.008) due most likely to the number of required patient ICD visits. Total hospitalizations and ED visits were higher for patients versus partners, but not significantly. The findings highlight the potential reciprocal influences of patient and partner responses to the ICD experience on health outcomes. Warranted are new, sound and feasible strategies to counterbalance partner needs while simultaneously optimizing patient recovery outcomes.

Cost effectiveness analysis for nursing research.

BACKGROUND: With ever-increasing pressure to reduce costs and increase quality, nurses are faced with the challenge of producing evidence that their interventions and care provide value. Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a tool that can be used to provide this evidence by comparative evaluation of the costs and consequences of two or more alternatives. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to introduce the essential components of CEA to nurses and nurse researchers with the protocol of a recently funded cluster randomized controlled trial as an example. METHODS: This article provides (a) a description of the main concepts and key steps in CEA and (b) a summary of the background and objectives of a CEA designed to evaluate a nursing-led pain and symptom management intervention in rural communities compared with the current usual care. DISCUSSION: As the example highlights, incorporating CEA into nursing research studies is feasible. The burden of the additional data collection required is offset by quantitative evidence of the given intervention's cost and impact using humanistic and economic outcomes. At a time when U.S. healthcare is moving toward accountable care, the information provided by CEA will be an important additional component of the evidence produced by nursing research.