Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jan;61(582):e49-62.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp11X549018.

End-of-life care conversations with heart failure patients: a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis

Stephen Barclay  1 , Natalie Momen, Steve Case-Upton, Isla Kuhn, Elizabeth Smith
Affiliations

End-of-life care conversations with heart failure patients: a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis

Stephen Barclay et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2011 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Current models of end-of-life care (EOLC) have been largely developed for cancer and may not meet the needs of heart failure patients.

Aim: To review the literature concerning conversations about EOLC between patients with heart failure and healthcare professionals, with respect to the prevalence of conversations; patients' and practitioners' preferences for their timing and content; and the facilitators and blockers to conversations.

Design of study: Systematic literature review and narrative synthesis.

Method: Searches of Medline, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases from January 1987 to April 2010 were conducted, with citation and journal hand searches. Studies of adult patients with heart failure and/or their health professionals concerning discussions of EOLC were included: discussion and opinion pieces were excluded. Extracted data were analysed using NVivo, with a narrative synthesis of emergent themes.

Results: Conversations focus largely on disease management; EOLC is rarely discussed. Some patients would welcome such conversations, but many do not realise the seriousness of their condition or do not wish to discuss end-of-life issues. Clinicians are unsure how to discuss the uncertain prognosis and risk of sudden death; fearing causing premature alarm and destroying hope, they wait for cues from patients before raising EOLC issues. Consequently, the conversations rarely take place.

Conclusion: Prognostic uncertainty and high risk of sudden death lead to EOLC conversations being commonly avoided. The implications for policy and practice are discussed: such conversations can be supportive if expressed as 'hoping for the best but preparing for the worst'.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Selection of papers.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lehman R, Doust J, Glasziou P. Cardiac impairment or heart failure? BMJ. 2005;331(7514):415–416. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roger V, Weston S, Redfield M, et al. Trends in heart failure incidence and survival in a community-based population. JAMA. 2004;292(3):344–350. - PubMed
    1. Cowie M, Wood D, Coats A, et al. Incidence and aetiology of heart failure; a population-based study. Eur Heart J. 1999;20(6):421–428. - PubMed
    1. NHS Information Centre. National heart failure audit 2010. Leeds: National Clinical Audit Support Programme; 2010.
    1. Rodriguez KL, Appelt CJ, Switzer GE, et al. Veterans' decision-making preferences and perceived involvement in care for chronic heart failure. Heart Lung. 2008;37(6):440–448. - PubMed

Publication types