Using Heart Failure Instruments to Determine when to Refer Heart Failure Patients to Palliative Care

AIM: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) or the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) are associated with traditionally used scores for heart failure patients -- specifically, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), an overall health visual analog scale (VAS), and the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM). Furthermore, we sought to determine whether the PPS or the ESAS provided additional information on quality of life, symptom severity, or prognosis above that provided by the traditional scores for patients with heart failure. METHODS: We administered the ESAS, MLHFQ, VAS, PPS, and SHFM in a shuffled manner to 78 New York Heart Association Functional Classification (NYHA-FC) Ill-IV ambulatory heart failure patients. Pearson's r correlation was used to determine whether the scores from the ESAS and PPS correlated with the scores from the MLHFQ, VAS, and SHFM. RESULTS: The sample was predominately male (62.8 percent), mean age 60.1 +/- 13 years, with a diagnosis of idiopathic cardiomyopathy (45 percent). Moderate correlations were found between the ESAS and MLHFQ (r = 0.483, p < 0.01), the ESAS and VAS (r = -0.345, p < 0.01), the PPS and MLHFQ (r = -0.54, p < 0.01), and the PPS and VAS (r = 0.53, p < 0.01). There was no significant correlation between the PPS and SHFM. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that administration of the ESAS and PPS provides additional information on symptom severity and functional decline for patients with heart failure. Standardized administration of these scales may aid in the assessment and evaluation of heart failure patients.