4.1 Article

Palliative Care Consultation in Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Retrospective Cohort Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE
卷 22, 期 4, 页码 432-436

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2018.0393

关键词

cardiogenic shock; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; heart-assist devices; intensive care units; observational study; palliative care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Little is known about palliative care consultation (PCC) for patients with cardiogenic shock requiring short-term mechanical circulatory support (STMCS). Objective: To describe the utilization of PCC in this population. Design: Retrospective cohort study in a university medical center intensive care unit (ICU). Setting/Participants: In total, 195 patients aged >18 years with cardiogenic shock requiring STMCS were included. The cohort was divided into three categories: no PCC, early PCC (within seven days of STMCS), and late PCC (eight or more days after STMCS). Follow-up occurred during the index hospitalization. Results: Mean age was 59.313.9 years; 67.9% were men. Mean follow-up period was 33.8 +/- 37.7 days. Overall inpatient mortality was 52.3%. Ninety-four patients (48.2%) received PCC; 49 (25.1%) and 45 (23.1%) received early and late PCCs, respectively. STMCS duration, ICU stay after STMCS, and hospital stay after STMCS were significantly shorter in the no PCC group than the early PCC group (4 vs. 12 days, p<0.001; 11 vs. 19 days, p=0.004; and 16 vs. 19 days, p=0.031; respectively). ICU stay after STMCS and hospital stay after STMCS were significantly shorter in the early PCC group than the late PCC group (19 vs. 38 days, p<0.001; 19 vs. 49 days, p<0.001; respectively). However, time from initial PCC to discharge was not significantly different between early and late PCC groups (18 vs. 31 days, p=0.13). Conclusions: PCC was utilized in almost half of patients with cardiogenic shock requiring STMCS. PCC tends to occur toward the end of life regardless of the duration of STMCS. The optimal PCC timing remained unclear.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据