| Literature DB >> 31884945 |
Ubolrat Piamjariyakul1, Trisha Petitte2, Angel Smothers2, Sijin Wen3, Elizabeth Morrissey2, Stephanie Young2, George Sokos4, Alvin H Moss5, Carol E Smith6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) afflicts 6.5 million Americans with devastating consequences to patients and their family caregivers. Families are rarely prepared for worsening HF and are not informed about end-of-life and palliative care (EOLPC) conservative comfort options especially during the end stage. West Virginia (WV) has the highest rate of HF deaths in the U.S. where 14% of the population over 65 years have HF. Thus, there is a need to investigate a new family EOLPC intervention (FamPALcare), where nurses coach family-managed advanced HF care at home.Entities:
Keywords: Appalachia; End-of-life; Heart failure; Palliative care; Randomized controlled trial; Study protocol
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31884945 PMCID: PMC6936135 DOI: 10.1186/s12904-019-0500-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Palliat Care ISSN: 1472-684X Impact factor: 3.234
List of Specific Aims, Hypotheses, and Objectives for the Study
Specific Aim 1: Test the FamPALcare nursing care intervention with patients and family members managing home supportive EOLPC for advanced HF in rural WV. Specific Aim 2: Assess implementation of the FamPALcare intervention and research procedures for subsequent clinical trials. |
FamPALcare Coaching Intervention (X1-X7) Sequence with Data Collection (O1-O3)
| Random Group Assignment | FamPALcare Intervention and Standard Care Groups | Follow-up Data Collection Post-Intervention | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline Data | FamPALcare Intervention | 3 months Booster | 6 months | |
| Group 1 FamPALcare Intervention | O1 | X1–X5 Weekly intervention across 5 weeks | X6, O2 Reinforcement on EOLPC options | X7, O3 Evaluation of FamPALcare |
| Group 2 Standard Care | O1 | Standard care | O2 | O3 |
Note. O1-O3 = observation, data collection time points; X1–X5 = FamPALcare coaching intervention of weekly home visits. Nurse-administered and conducted across 5 weeks, X6 = Booster Reinforcement at 3 months and reinforcement on each family selected conservative EOLPC options for patients and family members. X7 = Evaluation of FamPALcare
Measures and Instrument for Specific Aim 1 (Data collection at baseline, 3, and 6 months)
| Measures: Specific Aim 1, Hypothesis 1a, 1b | Operationally Defined |
|---|---|
| 1a. Patient’s Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) [ | Management of HF status, HF-related symptoms (i.e. breathlessness) and physical function status, α = 0.90.a |
| 1a. Tabulate proportion of patients selecting HF EOLPC options and signing advance directives, and. | Identify preferred HF conservative care options. Signed directives and confirmed EOLPC options |
| 1a.1b Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) Scale, [ | Assess patient’s/family caregiver’s depression and anxiety, α = 0.82.a Referral will be made [ |
| 1a.1b HF Home-Care Skills, [ | HF home care skills (i.e., if the patient’s legs/ feet are swollen, I contact MD/nurse), α = 0.80. |
| 1a.1b. Confidence in HF home care, [ | Perceived confidence in providing home HF EOLPC, α = 0.87a
|
| 1a.1b. Preparedness for HF EOLPC Home Care, [ | Perceived readiness/ability to manage home HF EOLPC. |
| 1b. Caregivers’ quality of life (QoL) SF12v2, [ | Caregivers’ physical and mental health outcomes. α = 0.90 to 0.93. |
| 1b. Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interviews, [ | Record physical, social, financial, and emotional components of home caregiving burden, α = 0.89.a, b |
Questionnaire Reliabilitya, b, c & Validityd, e, f; aCronbach’s alpha with HF patients; bCronbach’s alpha with healthy population; cReliability reported for adults with chronic illnesses >0.70; dFactor analysis loadings of subscales >0.35; eEstablished concurrent validity using correlation with other instruments or clinical ratings in known groups; fPublished norms or ranges