Effects of cardiac resynchronization therapy on health-related quality of life in older adults with heart failure

The aim of the study was to examine changes in health-related quality of life among older adults undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), a pacemaker based intervention for heart failure. Twenty-one patients (mean age = 68; SD = 8) completed measures of cardiovascular health and quality of life prior to and 3-months post-CRT. Following the intervention, patients reported improvements in their perception of their physical functioning (t = 2.8, p < 0.01) and feelings of vitality (t = 2.9, p < 0.01) on the MOS SF-36 Health Survey. Patients improved on objective clinical measures of exercise capacity, cardiac ejection fraction, and ventricular dyssynchrony. Younger patients reported greater improvements in physical functioning and decreases in pain. Higher baseline body mass index was associated with less improvement in physical functioning. Finally, patients with nonischemic heart failure reported greater improvements on multiple subscales of the SF-36 than patients with ischemic heart failure. This preliminary study documented improvements in health-related quality of life following CRT. The findings highlight that specific patient characteristics may be associated with quality of life changes. Future studies will benefit from including quality of life measures that assess multiple health-related domains

Age-Related Differences in Health-Related Quality of Life in COPD

OBJECTIVE: Younger persons with COPD report worse health-related quality of life (HRQL) than do older individuals. The factors explaining these differences remain unclear. The objective of this article was to explore factors associated with age-related differences in HRQL in COPD. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of participants with COPD, any Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease grade of airflow limitation, and ≥ 50 years old in two cohorts: the Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) study and the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS). We compared St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores by age group: middle-aged (age, 50-64) vs older (age, 65-80) adults. We used multivariate linear modeling to test associations of age with HRQL, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 4,097 participants in the COPDGene study (2,170 middle-aged and 1,927 older adults) SGRQ total scores were higher (worse) among middle-aged (mean difference, -4.2 points; 95% CI, -5.7 to -2.6; P < .001) than older adults. Age had a statistically significant interaction with dyspnea (P < .001). Greater dyspnea severity (modified Medical Research Council ≥ 2, compared with 0-1) had a stronger association with SGRQ score among middle-aged (β, 24.6; 95% CI, 23.2-25.9) than older-adult (β, 21.0; 95% CI, 19.6-22.3) participants. In analyses using SGRQ as outcome in 1,522 participants in SPIROMICS (598 middle-aged and 924 older adults), we found similar associations, confirming that for the same severity of dyspnea there is a stronger association with HRQL among younger individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Age-related differences in HRQL may be explained by a higher impact of dyspnea among younger subjects with COPD. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00608764 and No.: NCT01969344; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

Presence of Symptoms 6 Weeks After COVID-19 Among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated US Healthcare Personnel: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES: Although COVID-19 vaccines offer protection against infection and severe disease, there is limited information on the effect of vaccination on prolonged symptoms following COVID-19. Our objective was to determine differences in prevalence of prolonged symptoms 6 weeks after onset of COVID-19 among healthcare personnel (HCP) by vaccination status, and to assess differences in timing of return to work. DESIGN: Cohort analysis of HCP with COVID-19 enrolled in a multicentre vaccine effectiveness study. HCP with COVID-19 between December 2020 and August 2021 were followed up 6 weeks after illness onset. SETTING: Health systems in 12 US states. PARTICIPANTS: HCP participating in a vaccine effectiveness study were eligible for inclusion if they had laboratory-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 with mRNA vaccination (symptom onset ≥14 days after two doses) or no prior vaccination. Among 681 eligible participants, 419 (61%) completed a follow-up survey to assess symptoms reported 6 weeks after illness onset. EXPOSURES: Two doses of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine compared with no COVID-19 vaccine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of symptoms 6 weeks after onset of COVID-19 illness and days to return to work. RESULTS: Among 419 HCP with COVID-19, 298 (71%) reported one or more COVID-like symptoms 6 weeks after illness onset, with a lower prevalence among vaccinated participants compared with unvaccinated participants (60.6% vs 79.1%; adjusted risk ratio 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.84). Following their illness, vaccinated HCP returned to work a median 2.0 days (95% CI 1.0 to 3.0) sooner than unvaccinated HCP (adjusted HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.79). CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of two doses of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine among HCP with COVID-19 illness was associated with decreased prevalence of COVID-like symptoms at 6 weeks and earlier return to work

Factors associated with the decision to receive bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccination among health care personnel

ABSTRACTCOVID-19 vaccination is effective at reducing SARS-CoV-2 complications, but uptake has been low. Our objective in this study was to compare the importance of factors reported to influence the decision to receive a bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccine among health care personnel (HCP) tested for SARS-CoV-2 between October 2022 and April 2023 in a 20-hospital vaccine effectiveness study in the United States (n = 1656). Compared with those who had not received the booster, the factors most likely to be reported to be important were concerns about contracting COVID-19 (84.0% of those who had received the bivalent booster vs. 47.5% of those who had not, difference 36.6% points (PP), 95% confidence interval [CI] 32.1 to 41.1%), spreading infection to family members (89.2% vs. 62.8%, difference 26.3 PP, 95% CI 22.3 to 30.4%), and spreading infection to colleagues at work (85.5% vs. 59.4%, difference 26.1 PP, 95% CI 21.7 to 30.5%). HCP who had received the booster more frequently cited the primary literature (61.7% vs. 31.8%, difference 29.9 PP, 95% CI 24.6 to 35.2%) and employer recommendations (48.3% vs. 29.8%, difference 18.5 PP, 95% CI 13.2 to 23.9%) as influencing their decision. This analysis provides insight into factors for targeting future vaccine messaging

sj-docx-6-jpx-10.1177_23743735231151539 - Supplemental material for Patient Experiences with a Tertiary Care Post-COVID-19 Clinic

Supplemental material, sj-docx-6-jpx-10.1177_23743735231151539 for Patient Experiences with a Tertiary Care Post-COVID-19 Clinic by Alpana Garg, Maran Subramain, Patrick B Barlow, Lauren Garvin, Karin F Hoth, Kimberly Dukes, Richard M Hoffman and Alejandro P Comellas in Journal of Patient Experience</p