TY - JOUR
T1 - Adverse-Event Free Survival, Hospitalizations, and Mortality in Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients
T2 - A Rural-Urban Cohort Comparison
AU - Alonso, Windy
AU - Hupcey, Judith E.
AU - Kitko, Lisa
AU - Pozehl, Bunny
AU - Kupzyk, Kevin
N1 - Funding Information:
The research reported in this publication was fully supported by the National Institute of Nursing Research of the National Institutes of Health under award number F31NR016895. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Correspondence Windy Alonso, PhD, RN, University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Nursing, 985330 Nebraska Medical Center, 4111 Dewey Ave, Omaha, NE 68198-5330 ([email protected]). DOI: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000597
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - Background: The number of individuals with advanced heart failure (HF) receiving left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is growing. Postimplantation LVAD recipients return home to both rural and urban locations. The impact of rural or urban living on postimplantation outcomes has not been adequately explored. Objective: This cohort study examined adverse event–free survival, hospitalization-free survival, and all-cause mortality between rural and urban LVAD recipients in the first 2 years after implantation. Methods: Data from LVAD recipients (N = 141) implanted at a single center in the northeastern United States were analyzed. Recipients of LVAD were designated as rural or urban by county of residence. Adverse events, hospitalizations, and survival time were examined using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Thirty-seven percent of LVAD recipients in the cohort were rural. Two-thirds of all LVAD recipients experienced at least 1 adverse event (96/141, 68.1%). Although more urban recipients experienced adverse events, including death, rural versus urban models of both adverse events and survival were nonsignificant (adverse events: log-rank = 1.18, P = .28; hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57–1.63; P = .89; survival: log-rank =2.81, P = .09; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.17–1.23; P = .12). Rural LVAD recipients experienced significantly more hospitalizations and shorter hospitalization-free survival (log-rank = 6.67, P = .009). However, the HR for survival was nonsignificant (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.94–2.39; P = .08). Conclusions: Frequent adverse events and hospitalizations are of ongoing concern for LVAD recipients. More data are necessary to understand why urban LVAD recipients may experience shorter survival time compared with rural counterparts. Hospitalization may serve as a protective factor for rural LVAD recipients.
AB - Background: The number of individuals with advanced heart failure (HF) receiving left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is growing. Postimplantation LVAD recipients return home to both rural and urban locations. The impact of rural or urban living on postimplantation outcomes has not been adequately explored. Objective: This cohort study examined adverse event–free survival, hospitalization-free survival, and all-cause mortality between rural and urban LVAD recipients in the first 2 years after implantation. Methods: Data from LVAD recipients (N = 141) implanted at a single center in the northeastern United States were analyzed. Recipients of LVAD were designated as rural or urban by county of residence. Adverse events, hospitalizations, and survival time were examined using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Thirty-seven percent of LVAD recipients in the cohort were rural. Two-thirds of all LVAD recipients experienced at least 1 adverse event (96/141, 68.1%). Although more urban recipients experienced adverse events, including death, rural versus urban models of both adverse events and survival were nonsignificant (adverse events: log-rank = 1.18, P = .28; hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57–1.63; P = .89; survival: log-rank =2.81, P = .09; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.17–1.23; P = .12). Rural LVAD recipients experienced significantly more hospitalizations and shorter hospitalization-free survival (log-rank = 6.67, P = .009). However, the HR for survival was nonsignificant (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.94–2.39; P = .08). Conclusions: Frequent adverse events and hospitalizations are of ongoing concern for LVAD recipients. More data are necessary to understand why urban LVAD recipients may experience shorter survival time compared with rural counterparts. Hospitalization may serve as a protective factor for rural LVAD recipients.
KW - heart assist devices
KW - heart failure
KW - rural population
KW - urban population
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073184034&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073184034&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000597
DO - 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000597
M3 - Article
C2 - 31365445
AN - SCOPUS:85073184034
SN - 0889-4655
VL - 34
SP - 454
EP - 464
JO - Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
JF - Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
IS - 6
ER -