Key result
Individualized nurse-led care improves heart failure quality of life by ~9 points over routine care.
Why the study?
Heart failure causes high morbidity and impaired quality of life, and routine care may not fully address variable patient needs that tailored, nurse-led strategies in nutrition, activity, and psychosocial support could meet.
Does a 3-month individualized nursing program integrating nutrition, exercise, and psychosocial support improve quality of life and clinical outcomes in adults with heart failure?
Does a 3-month individualized nursing program integrating nutrition, exercise, and psychosocial support improve quality of life and clinical outcomes in adults with heart failure?
An individualized nurse-led intervention integrating nutrition, exercise, and psychosocial support significantly improves quality of life, cardiac function, and symptom resolution in patients with heart failure compared to routine care.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support nurse-led programs for heart failure quality of life; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials before practice change.
Background Heart failure (HF) is associated with high morbidity, readmissions, and impaired quality of life. Because patient responses vary, tailored, nurse-led strategies, particularly in nutrition, activity, and psychosocial support, may address needs that routine care does not fully meet. Objective To assess the effectiveness of an individualized, nurse-led intervention integrating nutrition, graded exercise, and psychosocial support in patients with HF. Methods This prospective, single-center, parallel-group study involved adults with HF (n = 110 per group), who were assigned to groups using an odd-even allocation method. The control group (CG) received routine nursing care. The observation group (OG) received the same routine care plus a 3-month individualized program comprising customized nutritional counseling, staged exercise guidance, and structured psychosocial support with follow-up. Baseline and follow-up assessments consisted of measuring time to symptom resolution, cardiac function, arterial blood gases, nutritional status, psychological status, quality of life, and adverse events between the two groups. Results Compared with routine nursing care (CG), individualized nurse-led care (OG) had shortened time to symptom improvement (dyspnea 2.05 ± 0.61 vs. 2.57 ± 0.76 days; p < 0.001), improved cardiac function (LVEF, CO ↑; LVEDD, LVESD ↓; 6MWT ↑; all p < 0.05), enhanced gas exchange (PaCO₂ ↓, PaO₂ ↑; both p < 0.05), and better nutritional status (p < 0.05). Additionally, the OG had improved psychological status (p < 0.05), enhanced quality of life (SF-36 75.43 ± 9.03 vs. 66.43 ± 9.09; p < 0.05), and fewer adverse events (6.36% vs. 20.0%; χ²=7.462; p = 0.006). Conclusion An individualized nurse-led intervention is associated with multidomain benefits in patients with HF, supporting the integration of personalized nursing strategies into routine HF care pathways.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied Heart failure (n=220). Individualized nurse-led intervention vs. Routine nursing care was evaluated on SF-36 quality of life score (MD 9.00, 95% CI 6.63-11.37, p=<0.001). An individualized nurse-led intervention significantly improved quality of life in patients with heart failure compared to routine care, increasing the mean SF-36 score by 9.00 points.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: