Literature DB >> 24861820

Psychosocial assessment of candidates and risk classification of patients considered for durable mechanical circulatory support.

Megan C Maltby1, Maureen P Flattery2, Brigid Burns3, Jeanne Salyer4, Stephan Weinland5, Keyur B Shah6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The psychosocial assessment of candidates for transplantation (PACT), developed to assess candidates for heart transplant, has not been routinely used to assess left ventricular assist device (LVAD) candidacy. We examined the efficacy of the PACT to assess psychosocial outcomes in LVAD patients.
METHODS: We reviewed patients who received LVAD implants between June 2006 and April 2011 and retrospectively applied the PACT. We determined the accuracy of identifying social success with the PACT and revised domains to reflect criteria influencing social success for LVAD patients.
RESULTS: Forty-eight patients (72% men, 44% non-white, 50.4 years old) were divided into high-scoring and low-scoring groups. Nine patients with low PACT scores were falsely categorized as high-risk, whereas 4 with high scores had poor social outcomes. The score had a high positive-predictive value (0.86) but low negative-predictive value (0.31). The PACT was revised (modified [m]PACT) to measure indicators, such as social support and understanding of care requirements, identified to more closely affect LVAD outcome. The mPACT exhibited improved accuracy. A reclassification table was developed, and the net reclassification index was 0.32. The percentage of patients incorrectly classified for social risk decreased from 27% with the PACT to 8% with the mPACT. Patients with higher mPACT scores had decreased 30-day readmission rates (26% vs 67%, p = 0.045) after device implantation.
CONCLUSIONS: By emphasizing social support, psychologic health, lifestyle factors, and device understanding, the mPACT showed improved performance in risk-stratifying candidates for LVAD therapy. Prospective validation is warranted.
Copyright © 2014 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  left ventricular assist device; modified psychosocial assessment of candidates for transplantation (mPACT); psychosocial assessment of candidates for transplantation (PACT); psychosocial outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24861820     DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.04.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant        ISSN: 1053-2498            Impact factor:   10.247


  7 in total

Review 1.  Psychosocial Challenges in Solid Organ Transplantation.

Authors:  Kristin Kuntz; Stephan R Weinland; Zeeshan Butt
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2015-09

Review 2.  Ventricular assist devices as destination therapy: psychosocial and ethical implications.

Authors:  Sherry Grogan; Kristin Kostick; Estevan Delgado; Courtenay R Bruce
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar

Review 3.  The Psychosocial Treadmill: the Road to Improving High-risk Behavior in Advanced Therapy Candidates.

Authors:  Laura Newman
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2018-04

4.  Palliative care and decision making in advanced heart failure.

Authors:  Lisa LeMond; S Albert Camacho; Sarah J Goodlin
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2015-02

5.  Psychosocial characteristics and outcomes in patients with left ventricular assist device implanted as destination therapy.

Authors:  David Snipelisky; John M Stulak; Sarah D Schettle; Shashank Sharma; Sudhir S Kushwaha; Shannon M Dunlay
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2015-08-16       Impact factor: 4.749

6.  Psychosocial Risk and Its Association With Outcomes in Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients.

Authors:  Ersilia M DeFilippis; Khadijah Breathett; Elena M Donald; Shunichi Nakagawa; Koji Takeda; Hiroo Takayama; Lauren K Truby; Gabriel Sayer; Paolo C Colombo; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Nir Uriel; Maryjane A Farr; Veli K Topkara
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 8.790

Review 7.  Are the current evaluation tools for advanced therapies biased?

Authors:  Raymond C Givens
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 2.108

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.