Search

Objective: Parathyroidectomy (PTX) is indicated in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) with osteoporosis or nephrolithiasis. There is not a uniform consensus on the benefit of PTX for nonspecific symptoms, but patient-reported questionnaires have demonstrated improved quality of life (QOL) afterward. This study aimed to evaluate physical activity and sleep after PTX using smartwatch technology., Methods: A prospective study of consecutive patients undergoing PTX for PHPT from August 2022 to July 2023 was conducted. Each patient received a smartwatch to continuously track physical activity and sleep, starting 1 month before to 6 months postoperatively. Euthyroid patients undergoing thyroidectomy served as controls. A disease-specific QOL questionnaire was completed at baseline and 6 months. Data were compared within and between groups using linear mixed effect models., Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled (PTX = 36, thyroidectomy = 9). The PTX group showed higher proportion of light sleep (68% vs 60%, P = .006), and a lower proportion of deep sleep (14% vs 18%, P < .001) when compared with the thyroidectomy group before surgery. After patients with PTX showed improvement in the QOL questionnaire (-16.0, P < .001) but there were no significant changes seen in the overall smartwatch physical activity or sleep patterns. However, improvements in the mood and sleep subcategory of the QOL questionnaire were associated with more deep sleep and lower number of nighttime awakenings., Conclusion: Patients with PHPT seem to have worse sleeping patterns at baseline. Significant improvement after PTX can be seen using QOL questionnaires that are associated with sleep smartwatch data., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 AACE. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a progressive genetic disease characterized by multisystem symptom burden. Specialist palliative care (PC), as a model of care, has been shown to be effective in improving quality of life and reducing symptom burden in other conditions, but has not been tested in CF. Objectives: To develop and test the feasibility and acceptability of a specialist PC intervention embedded within an outpatient CF clinic. Design: Single-site, equal-allocation randomized pilot study comparing usual care with addition of four protocolized quarterly visits with a PC nurse practitioner. Participants: Adults with CF age ≥18 years with any of the following: FEV 1 % predicted ≤50, ≥2 CF-related hospitalizations in the past 12 months, supplemental oxygen use, or noninvasive mechanical ventilation use, and moderate-or-greater severity of any symptoms on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Measurements: Randomization rate, intervention visit completion, data completements, participant ratings of intervention acceptability and benefit, and intervention delivery fidelity. Results: We randomized 50 adults with CF of 65 approached (77% randomization rate) to intervention ( n  = 25) or usual care ( n  = 25), mean age 38, baseline mean FEV 1 % predicted 41.8 (usual care), and 41.2 (intervention). No participants withdrew, five were lost to follow-up, and two died (88% retention). In the intervention group, 23 of 25 completed all study visits; 94% stated the intervention was not burdensome, and 97.6% would recommend the intervention to others with CF. More than 90% of study visits addressed topics prescribed by intervention manual. Conclusions: Adding specialist PC to standard clinic visits for adults with CF is feasible and acceptable.

Objectives: To identify patient perceptions of how and when palliative care (PC) could complement usual heart failure (HF) management. Background: Despite guidelines calling for the integration of PC into the management of HF, PC services remain underutilized by this population. Patient preferences regarding delivery of and triggers for PC are unknown. Setting/subjects: Individuals with New York Heart Association Class II-IV disease were recruited from inpatient and outpatient settings at an academic quaternary care hospital. Measurements: Participants completed semistructured interviews discussing perceptions, knowledge, and preferences regarding PC. They also addressed barriers and facilitators to PC delivery. Two investigators independently analyzed data using template analysis. Results: We interviewed 27 adults with HF (mean age 63, 85% white, 63% male, 30% Class II, 48% Class III, and 22% Class IV). Participants frequently conflated PC with hospice; once corrected, they expressed variable preferences for primary versus specialist services. Proponents of primary PC cited continuity in care, HF-specific expertise, convenience, and cost, whereas advocates for specialist care highlighted expertise in symptom management and caregiver support, reduced time constraints, and a comprehensive approach to care. Triggers for specialist PC focused on late-stage manifestations of disease such as loss of independence and absence of disease-directed therapies. Conclusions: Patients with HF demonstrated variable conceptions of PC and its relevance to their disease management. Although preferences for delivery model were based on a variety of logistical and relational factors, triggers for initiation remained focused on late-stage disease, suggesting that patients with HF may misconceive PC is an option of last resort.

Patients with heart failure (HF) and their families experience stress and suffering from a variety of sources over the course of the HF experience. Palliative care is an interdisciplinary service and an overall approach to care that improves quality of life and alleviates suffering for those living with serious illness, regardless of prognosis. In this review, we synthesize the evidence from randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in HF. While the evidence base for palliative care in HF is promising, it is still in its infancy and requires additional high-quality, methodologically sound studies to clearly elucidate the role of palliative care for patients and families living with the burdens of HF. Yet, an increase in attention to primary palliative care (e.g., basic physical and emotional symptom management, advance care planning), provided by primary care and cardiology clinicians, may be a vehicle to address unmet palliative needs earlier and throughout the illness course., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Importance: The use of palliative care programs and the number of trials assessing their effectiveness have increased., Objective: To determine the association of palliative care with quality of life (QOL), symptom burden, survival, and other outcomes for people with life-limiting illness and for their caregivers., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL to July 2016., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with life-limiting illness., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. Quality of life, symptom burden, and survival were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-palliative care scale (FACIT-Pal) instrument (range, 0-184 [worst-best]; minimal clinically important difference [MCID], 9 points); and symptom burden translated to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) (range, 0-90 [best-worst]; MCID, 5.7 points)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality of life, symptom burden, survival, mood, advance care planning, site of death, health care satisfaction, resource utilization, and health care expenditures., Results: Forty-three RCTs provided data on 12 731 patients (mean age, 67 years) and 2479 caregivers. Thirty-five trials used usual care as the control, and 14 took place in the ambulatory setting. In the meta-analysis, palliative care was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient QOL at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.83; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 11.36] and symptom burden at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, -0.66; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.07; ESAS mean difference, -10.30). When analyses were limited to trials at low risk of bias (n = 5), the association between palliative care and QOL was attenuated but remained statistically significant (standardized mean difference, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.34; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 4.94), whereas the association with symptom burden was not statistically significant (standardized mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.00; ESAS mean difference, -3.28). There was no association between palliative care and survival (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.17). Palliative care was associated consistently with improvements in advance care planning, patient and caregiver satisfaction, and lower health care utilization. Evidence of associations with other outcomes was mixed., Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis, palliative care interventions were associated with improvements in patient QOL and symptom burden. Findings for caregiver outcomes were inconsistent. However, many associations were no longer significant when limited to trials at low risk of bias, and there was no significant association between palliative care and survival., Competing Interests: Disclosures: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.