Happy Hearts Automatic Referral

• Main Author: Krmpotic, Kim
• Other Authors: Shea, Kimberly D.
• Language: en_US
• Published: The University of Arizona. 2015
• Subjects: Minnesota Living with Heart Failure; Quality of Life; Transitional Care; Nursing; Heart Failure
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10150/578384

Happy Hearts Automatic Referral (HHAR) was a program that referred heart failure (HF) patients to Transitional Care (TC) at Banner Health. The purpose of the human subject’s research was to examine the use of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure® questionnaire (MLHFQ) as a survey instrument to identify moderate quality of life (QOL) in patients living with HF. The most common referral to TC prior to the project was patients with poor QOL. The project explored the influence of earlier referrals to improve QOL for participants living with HF. The MLHFQ was chosen because it is a valid and reliable instrument specific to QOL. The HF population was chosen because the most commonly referred patients to interventions such as TC are those that pose the smallest risk for readmission, have the highest risk of readmission, or have the potential to demonstrate the most significant increase in QOL. By offering TC to patients with moderate QOL, an opportunity existed to reduce advancement into a population that is characteristic of high-risk readmissions. The project identified potential participants, then administered the MLHFQ, and scored it. When scores were between 26 and 45, participants were considered qualified participants for this project. Ideally, the patient would have been enrolled in TC for 30 days and the project would have administered another MLHFQ at completion of 30 days of TC to evaluate a change in QOL; however, due to the short-term nature of this project the TC content and follow-up administration of the MLHFQ was not evaluated. Also, while this project was taking place the TC team at Banner Health was not accepting new patients. A human subject’s research approach was applied and examined the responses to the MLHFQ from a small sample of five moderate QOL participants and described the expected responses for improved QOL if a second MLHFQ was to be administered following TC. Specifically items 1, 7, 8, 14, and 19 were examined to discuss how TC interventions might have improved scores on these items. The project concluded by describing how future cycles should be completed for further research.