Values are critical to how individuals make decisions and cope, yet the values of heart failure (HF) patients and their family caregivers (FCGs) remain understudied. We sought to report the state of the science on how values are discussed, reflected upon, and acted on by patients with HF, their FCGs, or both related to health-related decision making and coping.
Method
A scoping review was conducted of empirical studies using the following keywords: “heart failure,” “values,” “decision-making,” and “coping.” PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus were searched from inception to June 2022 in English. Included articles reported values as a key finding (outcome/theme) in their abstract.
Results
Of 448 articles screened for eligibility, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Twelve articles reported findings addressing patient values, 3 addressed patient and FCG values, and 1 addressed FCG values. Values were reported to influence patient self-care behaviors and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation decisions, although their prioritization varied across time and contexts. When prioritized values conflicted with recommended self-care activities, some patients modified their approach to achieving the value. Others modified or abandoned tasks in favor of the value and accompanying goals. Low motivation and alignment between unhealthy behaviors and values often led to nonadherent decisions. Five of 8 articles focusing on cardiac devices reported patient survival as the most prioritized value during implantation decisions. FCG values were rarely reported or evaluated separately from patient values. Patients leveraged several coping strategies, although the processes through which values affected coping was not described.
Conclusions
Prioritized values influenced HF-related decisions, including self-care and LVAD implantation. While several articles reported on coping and values, none described processes through which values affect coping, which highlights a research gap.
Highlights
Family caregiver values were rarely reported or evaluated separately from patient values, highlighting a gap in the literature.
Karimi-DehkordiMSpiersJClarkAM. An evolutionary concept analysis of “patients’ values.”Nurs Outlook. 2019;67:523–39. DOI: 10.1016/j.outlook.2019.03.005
2.
BerryABLLimCHartzlerAL, et al. Creating conditions for patients’ values to emerge in clinical conversations: perspectives of health care team members. DIS (Des Interact Syst Conf). 2017;2017:1165–74. DOI: 10.1145/3064663.3064669
3.
LimCYBerryABLHirschT, et al. Understanding what is most important to individuals with multiple chronic conditions: a qualitative study of patients’ perspectives. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32:1278–84. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-017-4154-3
4.
MatlockDDMcGuireWCMagidMAllenL. Decision making in advanced heart failure: bench, bedside, practice, and policy. Heart Fail Rev. 2017;22:559–64. DOI: 10.1007/s10741-017-9631-6
5.
CarrollSLEmbuldeniyaGPannagJ, et al. “I don’t know exactly what you’re referring to”: the challenge of values elicitation in decision making for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:1947–54. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S173705
6.
KarimiMClarkAM. How do patients’ values influence heart failure self-care decision-making? A mixed-methods systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;59:89–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.03.010
7.
MunroSStaceyDLewisKBBansbackN. Choosing treatment and screening options congruent with values: do decision aids help? Sub-analysis of a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99:491–500. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.10.026
8.
HamelAVGauglerJEPortaCMHadidiNN. Complex decision-making in heart failure: a systematic review and thematic analysis. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018;33:225–31. DOI: 10.1097/jcn.0000000000000453
9.
FolkmanS. Personal control and stress and coping processes: a theoretical analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1984;46:839–52. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.46.4.839
10.
RivkinILopezEDSTrimbleJEJohnsonSOrrEQuaintanceT. Cultural values, coping, and hope in Yup’ik communities facing rapid cultural change. J Community Psychol. 2019;47:611–27. DOI: 10.1002/jcop.22141
11.
KnightBGSilversteinMMcCallumTJFoxLS. A sociocultural stress and coping model for mental health outcomes among African American caregivers in Southern California. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2000;55:142–50. DOI: 10.1093/geronb/55.3.p142
12.
WongYJKimSHTranKK. Asian Americans’ adherence to Asian values, attributions about depression, and coping strategies. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2010;16:1–8. DOI: 10.1037/a0015045
13.
EvangelistaLSStrömbergADionne-OdomJN. An integrated review of interventions to improve psychological outcomes in caregivers of patients with heart failure. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2016;10:24–31. DOI: 10.1097/spc.0000000000000182
14.
AARP and National Alliance for Caregiving. Caregiving in the U.S. Washington (DC): AARP, 2020.
15.
KitkoLMcIlvennanCKBidwellJT, et al.; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research; Council on Clinical Cardiology; and Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health. Family caregiving for individuals with heart failure: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2020;141:e864–78. DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000000768
16.
GravenLJGrantJS. Coping and health-related quality of life in individuals with heart failure: an integrative review. Heart Lung. 2013;42:183–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2012.12.002
17.
LiCCShunSC. Understanding self care coping styles in patients with chronic heart failure: a systematic review. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016;15:12–19. DOI: 10.1177/1474515115572046
18.
MunnZPetersMDJSternCTufanaruCMcArthurAAromatarisE. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:143. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
19.
SagivLRoccasS. How do values affect behavior? Let me count the ways. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2021;25:295–316. DOI: 10.1177/10888683211015975
20.
TriccoACLillieEZarinW, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169:467–73. DOI: 10.7326/m18-0850
21.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ
. 2021;372:n71. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71
22.
ClarkCCHunterJ. Spirituality, spiritual well-being, and spiritual coping in advanced heart failure: review of the literature. J Holist Nurs. 2019;37:56–73. DOI: 10.1177/0898010118761401
23.
DillworthJDicksonVVReyentovichAShedlinMG. Patient decision-making regarding left ventricular assist devices: a multiple case study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2019;51:7–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.iccn.2018.10.004
24.
ScottoCJ. The lived experience of adherence for patients with heart failure. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 2005;25:158–63. DOI: 10.1097/00008483-200505000-00006
25.
AlbertNMForneyJSlifcakESorrellJ. Understanding physical activity and exercise behaviors in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung. 2015;44:2–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2014.08.006
26.
WallaceBCJonesJMasoudiFA, et al. Development and piloting of four decision aids for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in different media formats. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;44:1842–52. DOI: 10.1111/pace.14365
27.
NeoSHSKuJSMTanJYTYoonS. Deciding to live (or not) with a left ventricular assist device: a thematic analysis exploring factors influencing the decision-making process in advanced heart failure patients in Singapore. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2023;40(1):27–33. DOI: 10.1177/10499091221085275
28.
AllenLAMcIlvennanCKThompsonJS, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention supporting shared decision making for destination therapy left ventricular assist device: the DECIDE-LVAD randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178:520–29. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.8713
29.
Blumenthal-BarbyJSKostickKMDelgadoED, et al. Assessment of patients’ and caregivers’ informational and decisional needs for left ventricular assist device placement: implications for informed consent and shared decision-making. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015;34:1182–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.03.026
30.
KnoepkeCEChausseeELMatlockDD, et al. Changes over time in patient stated values and treatment preferences regarding aggressive therapies: insights from the DECIDE-LVAD trial. Med Decis Making. 2022;42:404–14. DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211028234
31.
McIlvennanCKMatlockDDThompsonJS, et al. Caregivers of patients considering a destination therapy left ventricular assist device and a shared decision-making intervention: the DECIDE-LVAD trial. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6:904–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.06.019
32.
DaleyCNCornetVPToscosTRBolchiniDPMirroMJHoldenRJ. Naturalistic decision making in everyday self-care among older adults with heart failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022;37:167–76. DOI: 10.1097/jcn.0000000000000778
33.
ClarkAMFreydbergCNMcAlisterFATsuyukiRTArmstrongPWStrainLA. Patient and informal caregivers’ knowledge of heart failure: necessary but insufficient for effective self-care. Eur J Heart Fail. 2009;11:617–21. DOI: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfp058
34.
HicksFDHolmK. Self-management decision influences in heart failure: a preliminary investigation. Clin Nurs Res. 2003;12:69–84. DOI: 10.1177/1054773803238741
35.
Karimi-DehkordiMClarkAM. Views of patients with heart failure on their value-based self-care decisions: a qualitative study. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020;35:89–98. DOI: 10.1097/jcn.0000000000000733
36.
NakagawaSYuzefpolskayaMColomboPCNakaYBlindermanCD. Palliative care interventions before left ventricular assist device implantation in both bridge to transplant and destination therapy. J Palliat Med. 2017;20:977–83. DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2016.0568
37.
SedlarNLainscakMFarkasJ. Self-care perception and behaviour in patients with heart failure: a qualitative and quantitative study. ESC Heart Fail. 2021;8:2079–88. DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.13287
38.
ZhangKMDindoffKArnoldJMLaneJSwartzmanLC. What matters to patients with heart failure? The influence of non-health-related goals on patient adherence to self-care management. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98:927–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.04.011
39.
WittemanHONdjaboueRVaissonG, et al. Clarifying values: an updated and expanded systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Decis Making. 2021;41:801–20. DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211037946
40.
BerryABLLimCHartzlerAL, et al. Eliciting values of patients with multiple chronic conditions: evaluation of a patient-centered framework. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018;2017:430–39.
41.
McIlvennanCKAllenLANowelsCBriekeAClevelandJCMatlockDD. Decision making for destination therapy left ventricular assist devices: “there was no choice” versus “I thought about it an awful lot.”Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:374–80. DOI: 10.1161/circoutcomes.113.000729
42.
SchwartzSHCieciuchJ. Measuring the refined theory of individual values in 49 cultural groups: psychometrics of the revised portrait value questionnaire. Assessment. 2022;29:1005–19. DOI: 10.1177/1073191121998760
43.
SagivLSchwartzSH. Personal values across cultures. Annu Rev Psychol. 2022;73:517–46. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-125100
44.
LynchKABernalCRomanoDR, et al. Navigating a newly diagnosed cancer through clinician-facilitated discussions of health-related patient values: a qualitative analysis. BMC Palliat Care. 2022;21:29. DOI: 10.1186/s12904-022-00914-7
45.
OberschmidtKBroekhuisMGrünlohC. Patient values associated with an exergame supporting COPD treatment. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022;294:730–34. DOI: 10.3233/shti220573
46.
ComelloMLNFrancisDBHurstingLSwarnerEMarshallLH. Values of cancer survivors and the supportive role of recreational video games. J Health Psychol. 2021;26:1243–57. DOI: 10.1177/1359105319871663
47.
GarvelinkMMNganguePAAdekpedjouR, et al. A synthesis of knowledge about caregiver decision making finds gaps in support for those who care for aging loved ones. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016;35:619–26. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1375
48.
Vara-GarcíaCRomero-MorenoRBarrera-CaballeroS, et al. Personal values profiles in dementia family caregivers: their association with ambivalent feelings and anxious and depressive symptoms. Aging Ment Health. 2021;25:2160–68. DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2020.1821169
49.
Writing Committee Members and ACC/AHA Joint Committee Members. 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline for the management of heart failure. J Card Fail. 2022;28:e1–167. DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2022.02.010
50.
MoonHTownsendALWhitlatchCJDilworth-AndersonP. Quality of life for dementia caregiving dyads: effects of incongruent perceptions of everyday care and values. Gerontologist. 2017;57:657–66. DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnw055
51.
BechtholdACMontgomeryAPFazeliPLDionne-OdomJN. Values elicitation among adults making health-related decisions: a concept analysis. Nurs Forum. 2022;57:885–92. DOI: 10.1111/nuf.12730
52.
KuraszAMSmithGECurielRE, et al. Patient values in healthcare decision making among diverse older adults. Patient Educ Couns. 2022;105:1115–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.031
53.
MerazR. Decisions for medication nonadherence: stories from older adults with heart failure. Heart Lung. 2020;49:217–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2020.02.026
54.
RiegelBDicksonVV. A situation-specific theory of heart failure self-care. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2008;23:190–96. DOI: 10.1097/01.Jcn.0000305091.35259.85
55.
AlhuraniASDekkerRAhmadM, et al. Stress, cognitive appraisal, coping, and event free survival in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung. 2018;47:205–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2018.03.008
56.
MurbergTBruEStephensP. Personality and coping among congestive heart failure patients. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;32:775–84. DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00081-2
57.
DoeringLVDracupKCaldwellMA, et al. Is coping style linked to emotional states in heart failure patients?J Card Fail. 2004;10:344–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2003.10.001
58.
ZimmermannTDolleSWaldenburgerNJünemannFBaraC. Relationship quality, dyadic coping, and depression in couples with left ventricular assist device implantation. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021;20:342–47. DOI: 10.1093/eurjcn/zvaa004
59.
RiegelBDicksonVVVelloneE. The situation-specific theory of heart failure self-care: an update on the problem, person, and environmental factors influencing heart failure self-care. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022;37(6):515–29. DOI: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000919
60.
MolinaEJShahPKiernanMS, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs 2020 annual report. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;111:778–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.12.038
61.
TsaoCWAdayAWAlmarzooqZI, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2022 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2022;145:e153–639. DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000001052
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
