Search

Background In Europe, more than 15 million people live with heart failure (HF). It imposes an enormous social, organizational and economic burden. As a reaction to impending impact on healthcare provision, different country-specific structures for HF-care have been established. The aim of this report is to provide an overview and compare the HF-care approaches of Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and the UK, and to open the possibility of learning from each other's experience. Methods A mixed methods approach was implemented that included a literature analysis, interviews and questionnaires with HF-patients and caregivers, and expert interviews with representatives from healthcare, health service research and medical informatics. Results The models of HF-care in all countries analyzed are based on the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of HF. Even though the HF-models differed in design and implementation in practice, key challenges were similar: (i) unequal distribution of care between urban and rural areas, (ii) long waiting times, (iii) unequal access to and provision of healthcare services, (iv) information and communication gaps and (v) inadequate implementation and financing of digital applications. Conclusion Although promising approaches exist to structure and improve HF-care, across the four countries, implementation was reluctant to embrace novel methods. A lack of financial resources and insufficient digitalization making it difficult to adopt new concepts. Integration of HF-nurses seems to be an effective way of improving current models of HF-care. Digital solutions offer further opportunities to overcome communication and coordination gaps and to strengthen self-management skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background the mySupport advance care planning intervention was originally developed and evaluated in Northern Ireland (UK). Family caregivers of nursing home residents with dementia received an educational booklet and a family care conference with a trained facilitator to discuss their relative's future care. Objectives to investigate whether upscaling the intervention adapted to local context and complemented by a question prompt list impacts family caregivers' uncertainty in decision-making and their satisfaction with care across six countries. Second, to investigate whether mySupport affects residents' hospitalisations and documented advance decisions. Design a pretest–posttest design. Setting in Canada, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK, two nursing homes participated. Participants in total, 88 family caregivers completed baseline, intervention and follow-up assessments. Methods family caregivers' scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale and Family Perceptions of Care Scale before and after the intervention were compared with linear mixed models. The number of documented advance decisions and residents' hospitalisations was obtained via chart review or reported by nursing home staff and compared between baseline and follow-up with McNemar tests. Results family caregivers reported less decision-making uncertainty (−9.6, 95% confidence interval: −13.3, −6.0, P  < 0.001) and more positive perceptions of care (+11.4, 95% confidence interval: 7.8, 15.0; P  < 0.001) after the intervention. The number of advance decisions to refuse treatment was significantly higher after the intervention (21 vs 16); the number of other advance decisions or hospitalisations was unchanged. Conclusions the mySupport intervention may be impactful in countries beyond the original setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]