Key result
Motivational interviewing for heart failure patients and their caregivers reduced 3-month mortality compared to control (0.6% vs 5.1%; HR 0.112, 95% CI 0.014-0.882, P=0.04).
Why the study?
Intense health-care service use and high mortality are common in heart failure patients, but the effectiveness of motivational interviewing in reducing these outcomes was unclear.
Does motivational interviewing reduce health-care service use and mortality in heart failure patients?
RCT (n=510)
randomized
Does motivational interviewing reduce health-care service use and mortality in heart failure patients?
Hazard Ratio: 0.112 (95% CI 0.014–0.882)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.6% vs 5.1%
p-value: p=0.04
Motivational interviewing that includes caregivers may temporarily reduce short-term mortality in heart failure patients, though it does not significantly impact long-term mortality or healthcare service use.
Supports incorporating motivational interviewing into heart failure care; extends RCT evidence for dyadic interventions on short-term mortality.
AIMS: Intense health-care service use and high mortality are common in heart failure (HF) patients. This secondary analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF trial investigates the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) in reducing health-care service use (e.g. emergency service use and hospitalizations) and all-cause mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study used a randomized controlled trial. Patients and caregivers were randomized to Arm 1 (MI for patients), Arm 2 (MI for patients and caregivers), or Arm 3 (control group). Data were collected at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Face-to-face MI plus three telephone calls were performed in Arms 1 and 2. The sample consisted of 510 patient (median age 74 years, 58% male patients) and caregiver dyads (median age 55 years, 75% female patients). At 12 months, 16.1%, 17%, and 11.2% of patients used health-care services at least once in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively, without significant difference. At 3 months, 1.9%, 0.6%, and 5.1% of patients died in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mortality was lower in Arm 2 vs. Arm 3 at 3 months [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.112, 95% CI: 0.014-0.882, P = 0.04]; no difference was found at subsequent follow-ups. Mortality was lower in Arm 1 vs. Arm 3 at 3 months but did not reach statistical significance (HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.104-1.414, P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that MI reduces mortality in patients with HF if caregivers are included in the intervention. Further studies with a stronger intervention and longer follow-up are needed to clarify the benefits of MI on health-care service use and mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iovino et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=510). Motivational interviewing for patients and caregivers vs. Control group was evaluated on All-cause mortality at 3 months (HR 0.112, 95% CI 0.014-0.882, p=0.04). Motivational interviewing for heart failure patients and their caregivers reduced 3-month mortality compared to control (0.6% vs 5.1%; HR 0.112, 95% CI 0.014-0.882, P=0.04).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: