Skip Navigation

European Journal of Heart Failure 2004 6(5):535-537; doi:10.1016/j.ejheart.2004.04.010
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ward, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ward, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2004 European Society of Cardiology

The quality of life in heart failure Just talking about it will not make it better

Christopher Ward

Department of Cardiology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School Dundee, Scotland DD1 9SY, UK

Conventional treatment does not prevent heart failure patients from having intrusive symptoms and a poor quality of life (QOL) [1,2]. Government initiatives in the UK [3,4], and more widely within Europe, the ESC Task Force Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure [5], have published guidance to address these issues. A priority is to improve on the current figure of 20% of patients [6] prescribed the recommended drugs. However, the guidelines also stress the need for a ‘palliative care approach’ which ‘recognises the importance of promoting physical, psychosocial, and sometimes spiritual well being. It emphasises quality of life, good symptom control, a whole person approach, respect for patient autonomy and open sensitive communication’ [3]. These objectives are not fanciful but should be provided for all patients as of right [7].

If health, ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well being, and not merely the absence of disease’ [8] is impaired, the QOL, ‘the difference between the patient's perceived expectations and achievement’ [9], deteriorates. Cardiologists, in common with most doctors, treat patients in order to relieve symptoms or to prolong life and assume that this will improve its quality: We have only limited, often second hand, experience of treatments which have the primary purpose of enhancing it. However, persevering with the established strategy when faced with unrelieved symptoms, a poor QOL and inevitable deterioration as happens in advanced heart failure, does not ensure that the patient will ‘feel better’ [10–12]. Under these circumstances it is logical to concentrate more on strategies, which are designed to improve QOL.

Studies which have evaluated the QOL in heart failure have shown that, as in cancer patients, it is not only affected by symptom and disease severity but also by a complex interaction of physical, social and psychological factors [13,14]. These include personal coping strategies, social isolation, a fear of dying, a lack of information about the disease and its treatment, exclusion from management planning, anxiety, depression and insomnia [15–18]. Addressing these generic concerns can improve both the QOL and the prognosis [19] even when manipulating conventional treatments does not. However, because patients often do not mention these concerns and because of poor communication with them, a consistent criticism of heart failure management [20], the need for this type of intervention, is often overlooked [1].

Many QOL questionnaires used in clinical practice are well tested and give reproducible results [21]. However, those which rely on an objective point-score assessment, including some of the most widely used ones [22–24], may be insensitive to the subtle impact of subjective factors such as those just listed [25] and which are also implicit in the definition of QOL [10]. The resultant over optimistic assessment of QOL is less likely if questionnaires are used which include patients’ self-assessment of their QOL [25].

The paper by Boyd et al. in this issue of the journal is therefore timely. The authors canvassed the views of heart failure patients and their carers, about their health, other concerns and the adequacy of social support provided for them in the last year of life using a prospective, longitudinal, qualitative evaluation. This is a well validated method of assessment [26], which, in contrast to quantitative studies, uses detailed open exploration of issues in which interviewees are encouraged to talk openly rather than to respond to fixed questions. Serial interviews were used to identify changes in the factors, which impair the QOL with disease progression. Common complaints included physical and psychological morbidity, social isolation, inadequate information about their condition, and uncoordinated and limited professional support. The merit of this paper is not the novelty of the findings, some of which are common knowledge, but more that, because of its subjective format, it graphically and clearly shows why the QOL is so poor, explains the frustrations and concerns of the carers, and shows how the factors responsible for the poor QOL change with disease progression. These are valuable insights. The authors also make valid suggestions for changes to management, and for staff and patient educational programmes to address the problems. However, like previous authors, they have not explained how to put their suggestions into practice: Nor have our cardiac societies taken up this challenge, although the need for action was identified many years ago [14].

There are a number of reasons, real and imagined, for the delay. The implementation of new treatments is often slow [6], and with this particular issue, specific cultural, professional and organisational barriers to progress have been cited [27]. Most suggestions for providing palliative support for heart failure patients envisage collaboration between cardiology, palliative care and primary care teams, which has caused concerns within these groups that they will face excessive demands [28–31]. However, these suggestions infer, incorrectly, that cardiologists care for the majority of heart failure patients and that only palliative care teams can provide the palliative care, which most heart failure patients will require. In fact, most hospitalised patients are not cared for by cardiologists but by general physicians or geriatricians [32], and general practitioners already accept that patients often prefer to be treated at home [27]. With respect to palliative care services, many patients regard their QOL as satisfactory and so may not want or need them [35,36]. Also, the only published, very limited, observations on the demands for palliative care services have shown that currently less than 1% of patients hospitalised with advanced heart failure are referred to palliative care teams [37,38]. This is partly because a ‘palliative approach’ [3] is increasingly used by non-palliative care staff [33], as are palliative care treatment protocols and pathways for the care of the dying [34].

Several other staff-related factors are also relevant to the provision of palliative care support: The chronic sick appreciate having continuity of care [31], and management plans should therefore provide support for patients’ existing medical carers, not change them for others. Only a minority of cardiologists regard heart failure as their main interest and neither they nor palliative care physicians have the expertise to optimally manage this predominantly elderly, often housebound patient group, with multiple complex clinical problems. There are, however, medical and nursing groups with the relevant experience: geriatricians care for many heart failure patients and are experienced in the management of elderly patients with multiple pathologies, but their potential role in management planning for heart failure has been largely ignored. Specialist heart failure nurses provide high quality management to heart failure patients, and already, some aspects of palliative care [33], while palliative care nurses are increasingly involved with non-cancer patients. Primary care doctors and nurses have a better understanding of individual patient's social and domestic circumstances, which have a major impact on their QOL, than do hospital staff. Thus, by imaginatively involving a wide range of staff, the demands on any one group will be much less than is feared. At the same time, patients would benefit from an improvement in palliative and cardiological support and in the attention given to their other medical and social problems.

With this scenario, a realistic role for cardiologists would be to manage patients already in their care, and with the help of palliative care teams and others with relevant expertise, to provide training and clinical support for colleagues and nurses who are treating the majority of heart failure patients.

A strategy to provide palliative care for heart failure patients would be incomplete without an accompanying research programme. This should initially concentrate on confirming the efficacy of established palliative care treatment protocols in patients with heart failure, developing new symptom control programmes and on piloting different service models to deliver palliative care support.

We need to move on from documenting the problems of heart failure patients to developing realistic, practical solutions to them. As cardiologists we have a responsibility to contribute to this process [3–5] through our national and international societies.


   References
Top
 References
 

  1. Anderson H., Ward C., Eardley A., et al. The concerns of patients under palliative care and a heart failure clinic are not being met. Palliative Med (2001) 15:279–286.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. McCarthy M., Lay M., Addington-Hall J. Dying from heart disease. J R Coll Phys London (1996) 30:325–328.[Web of Science][Medline]
  3. Department of Health. National Service Framework for Coronary Heart Disease: DOH, 2000.
  4. Strategy for Scotland Scottish Executive. Coronary Heart disease and Stroke: Strategy for Scotland, (www.scotland.gov.uk).
  5. Remme W.J., Swedberg K. Task force report: guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J (2001) 22:1527–1560.[Free Full Text]
  6. The European Heart Failure Survey programme: Study Group Report. Part 2: Treatment. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: pp. 464–475.
  7. Withholding and withdrawing life-prolonging treatments: good practice in decision-making. General Medical Council, 2002, (www.gmc-uk.org).
  8. World Health Organisation. Cancer pain relief and palliative care. Technical Report Series 804 Geneva. WHO, 1990.
  9. Calman K.C. Quality of life in cancer patients: an hypothesis. J Med Ethics (1984) 10:124–127.[Free Full Text]
  10. Packer M., Colucci W.S., Sackner-Bernstein J.D., et al. Double blind, placebo-controlled study of the effects of carvedilol in patients with moderate to severe heart failure. Circulation (1996) 94:2793–2799.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Bristow M.R., Gilbert E.M., Abraham W.T., et al. Carvedilol produces dose-related improvements in left ventricular function and survival in subjects with chronic heart failure. Circulation (1996) 94:2807–2816.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Jenkinson C., Jenkinson D., Shepperd S., Layte R., Petersen S. Evaluation of treatment for congestive heart failure in patients aged 60 years and older using generic measures of health status (SF-36 and COOP charts). Age Ageing (1997) 26:7–13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Majani G., Pierobon A., Giardini A., et al. Relationship between psychological profile and cardiological profile in chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J (1999) 20:1579–1586.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Stewart A.L., Greenfied S., Hays R.D., et al. Functional status and well being of patients with chronic conditions. Results from the medical outcome study. J Am Med Assoc (1989) 262:907–913.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Dracup K., Walden J.A., Stevenson L.W. Quality of life in patients with advanced heart failure. J Heart Lung Transplant (1992) 11:273–279.[Web of Science][Medline]
  16. Rosen R., Contrada R.J., Gorkin L., Kostis J.B. Determinants of percieved health in patients with left ventricular dysfunction: a structural modelling analysis. Psychosom Med (1997) 59:193–200.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Westlake C, Dracup K, Creser J, et al. Correlates of health-related quality of life in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung 31: pp. 85–93.
  18. Rideout E., Montemuro M. Hope, morale and adaptation in patients with chronic heart failure. J Adv Nurs (1986) 11:429–438.[Web of Science][Medline]
  19. Stewart S., Horowitz J.D. Improving outcomes I chronic heart failure—Stewart S., Blue L., eds. (2001) BMJ Books. 94–113.
  20. Lynn J., Teno J.M., Phillips R.S., et al. Perceptions by family members of the dying experience of older and seriously ill patients. Ann Intern Med (1997) 126:97–106.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Fallowfield L. Quality of quality of life data. Lancet (1996) 348:421.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  22. Bergner M., Bobbitt R.A., Carter W.B. The sickness impact profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care (1981) 19:787–805.[Web of Science][Medline]
  23. Stewart A.L., Hays R.D., Ware J.E. The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care (1988) 26:724–735.[Web of Science][Medline]
  24. Rector T.S., Kubo S.H., Cohn J.N. Patients self-assessment of their congestive heart failure. Part 2: Content, reliability and validity of a new measure, The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Heart Fail (1987) 3:198–209.
  25. Gill T.M., Feinstein A.R. A critical appraisal of the quality of quality life measurements. J Am Med Assoc (1994) 272:619–624.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Mays N., Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ (1995) 311:109–112.[Free Full Text]
  27. Hanratty B., Hibbert D., Mair F., et al. Doctors perceptions of palliative care for heart failure: focus group study. BMJ (2002) 325:581–585.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. McDonald K., Ledwidge M., Cahill J., et al. Heart failure Management: multidisciplinary care has intrinsic benefit above the optimisation of medical care. J Card Fail (2002) 8:142–148.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  29. Linden B. Severe heart failure: a focus on the quality of life. Nurs Times (1995) 91:38–39.[Medline]
  30. Gibbs L.M.E., White P.T., Gibbs J.S.R. Palliative care and heart failure—Is the tide turning? Br J Cardiol (2001) 8:409–410.
  31. Murray A., Boyd K., Kendall M., et al. Dying of lung cancer or cardiac failure: prospective qualitative interview of patients and their carers in the community. BMJ (2002) 325:929–932.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Stewart S., MacIntyre K., MacLeod M.M.C., et al. Trends in hospitalisation for heart failure in Scotland 1990–1996. Eur Heart J (2001) 22:209–217.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Blue L., McMurray J.J.V.A. Specialist nurse-led home-based intervention in Scotland. In: Improving outcomes in chronic heart failure. BMJ Books—Stewart S., Blue L., eds. (2001) 79–93.
  34. Ellershaw J., Ward C. Care of the dying patient: the last hours or days of life. BMJ (2003) 326:30–34.[Free Full Text]
  35. Jasgoslid P., Dawson N.V., Thomas C., et al. Outcomes of acute exacerbation of severe congestive heart failure: quality of life, resource use, and survival. SUPPORT Investigators. The study to understand prognosis and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments. Arch Intern Med (1998) 158:1081–1089.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Jaarsma T., Halfens R., Abu-Saad H.H., et al. Quality of life in older patients with systolic and diastolic heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail (1999) 1:151–160.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Beattie J., Murray R.G., Brittle J., Catanheira T. Palliative care in terminal cardiac failure. Small numbers of patients with terminal cardiac failure may make considerable demands on services. BMJ (1995) 310:1411.[Free Full Text]
  38. McDonagh T. Personal Communication, 2004.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
M.J. Lenzen, W.J.M. Scholte op Reimer, and M. Komajda
Differences between patients with a preserved and a depressed left ventricular function: a report from the EuroHeart Failure Survey: reply
Eur. Heart J., March 1, 2005; 26(5): 526 - 526.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ward, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ward, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?