Evaluation of the SIPAT instrument to assess psychosocial risk in heart transplant candidates: A retrospective single center study

Abstract Objectives We evaluated the reliability of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) in heart transplant (HT) recipients and explored its usefulness in predicting post-transplant outcomes. Background Pre-transplant psychosocial and behavioral risk is associ...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Heart & lung 2017-07, Vol.46 (4), p.273-279
Main Authors: Vandenbogaart, Elizabeth, MSN, ACNP, Doering, Lynn, RN, PhD, Chen, Belinda, MPH, Saltzman, Ann, LCS, Chaker, Tamara, MSN, ACNP, Creaser, Julie W., MSN, CNS, Rourke, Darlene, MN, CNS, Cheng, Richard W., MD, Fonarow, Gregg C., MD, FACC, FAHA, Deng, Mario, MD, FACC, FESC
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Assessment tool
Cardiovascular
Critical Care
Female
Health Status Indicators
Heart transplant evaluation
Heart Transplantation - psychology
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Outcomes
Psychological Tests
Psychosocial risk
Pulmonary/Respiratory
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment - methods
Surveys and Questionnaires
Transplant candidate selection
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objectives We evaluated the reliability of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) in heart transplant (HT) recipients and explored its usefulness in predicting post-transplant outcomes. Background Pre-transplant psychosocial and behavioral risk is associated with post-transplant clinical outcomes. SIPAT is a risk assessment tool created for pre-transplant psychosocial evaluation. Methods Via retrospective chart review, three examiners applied the SIPAT to 51 adult HT recipients. Examiners blinded to SIPAT scores extracted data and interviewed clinicians for one-year post-transplant outcomes. Analysis included Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson's correlation coefficient and Chi-square. Results SIPAT demonstrated strong inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.76–0.96). Compared to those with SIPAT ratings of “Excellent/Good”, the “Minimally Acceptable Candidate/High Risk” group was more likely to miss clinic visits ( p  = 0.004). Conclusions The SIPAT tool had strong IRR. Less favorable SIPAT ratings were associated with nonadherence to clinic visits. Further study is warranted to determine association of SIPAT ratings to clinical outcomes.
ISSN:0147-9563
1527-3288
DOI:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2017.04.005