Gurvitz, Michelle

Adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) constitute a growing population with challenges related to cardiovascular and neurological health. Many individuals born with CHD experience neurodevelopmental delays in childhood. Ongoing neurocognitive and psychological concerns impact education, employment, and quality of life. Despite this, interventions to address these issues are largely unexplored. Collaborations among multidisciplinary experts and patient partners culminated at a 2‐day Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD)/Neuro Conference (April 2024) to review the current state of knowledge and guide future directions for research and clinical care. Three working groups separately focused on genetics and brain health, characterizing outcomes, and interventions among patients with ACHD. This article focuses on the work of the interventions group. A consensus statement was created to synthesize current knowledge, identify key gaps, and recommend next steps around 5 critical questions designed to guide research and clinical care for interventions with ACHD: (1) What interventions are effective for improving neurocognitive functioning? (2) What interventions are effective for improving psychological wellbeing? (3) What evidence do we have about safety and efficacy of psychotropic medications? (4) What interventions can improve health literacy? (5) What are modifiable facilitators and barriers to accessing high‐quality neurocognitive and psychological interventions? Limited research and fragmented health systems hinder interventions in ACHD. Efforts from pediatric congenital heart disease could inform the ACHD community. Although interventions are costly and resource intensive, neglecting neurocognitive and psychological needs could lead to lower quality of life and higher health care costs. By ultimately shifting to prevention and intervention, the ACHD community could facilitate positive outcomes.

Individuals with congenital heart disease are living well into adulthood, resulting in a growing population at risk for neurocognitive and psychosocial challenges. Numerous studies have described these risks in childhood, but significant gaps remain in our understanding of how those challenges evolve across stages of adulthood and how to optimally integrate neurocognitive and psychosocial care for adults with congenital heart disease. A multidisciplinary group of experts and patient partners assembled in April 2024 in Atlanta, GA, forming 3 working groups: (1) Genetics and Brain Health, (2) Characterizing Neuropsychological and Psychological Outcomes, and (3) Neuropsychological and Psychosocial Interventions. Current knowledge was reviewed, knowledge gaps were identified, and recommendations to address these gaps were formulated. Five critical questions regarding the characterization of neuropsychological and psychological outcomes of adults with congenital heart disease were prioritized for discussion: which neurocognitive and psychosocial domains should be prioritized in research and clinical care, what are the trajectories of neurocognitive and psychosocial functioning over the lifespan, how should neurocognitive and psychosocial screening be deployed, what should neurocognitive and psychosocial assessments include, and how do we make comprehensive neurocognitive and psychosocial care a reality. Although many gaps in knowledge were identified, particularly around characterizing neurocognitive trajectories throughout adulthood, there is substantial evidence of increased risk for poor psychosocial outcomes among adults with with congenital heart disease. Clinical and research advances must progress in tandem to address these risks. Specific recommendations for advancing this field over the next decade are offered.

With improvement in medical and surgical care, the number of adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) is soaring. Adults with CHD commonly have impairments in brain health. However, significant gaps in knowledge remain regarding the relevant types and prevalence of neurologic and psychiatric risk and their associated risk factors. We sought to review current evidence, identify gaps in knowledge, and develop key next steps to improve scientific understanding and clinical care. Three working groups—Genetics and Brain Health, Characterizing Neuropsychological and Psychological Outcomes, and Neuropsychological and Psychosocial Interventions—were composed of multidisciplinary experts in relevant clinical and research domains, as well as adults with CHD. Each group identified 5 key knowledge gaps and associated next investigations needed to address those gaps. For Genetics and Brain Health, 5 key knowledge gaps were identified: lack of a standardized neuroimaging protocol for adults with CHD, need to understand neuroradiological–pathological–neuropsychological correlates, role of gene–environment interactions, what can be learned from brain health risk models from other groups, and how existing multimodal approaches influence risk and neuroresilience. Adults with CHD can benefit from routine assessment of brain health, as well as increased clinical and basic research into the underlying factors that contribute to risk and neuroresilience for neurologic and psychiatric sequalae. Multidisciplinary collaborative efforts that incorporate adults with CHD across the research cycle are essential for all key next steps.

Background: Adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) face ongoing physical, emotional, and psychosocial challenges that impact long-term outcomes. Research is limited on how their health topic interests vary by levels of empowerment. The 15-item Gothenburg Empowerment Scale (GES) assesses CHD patient empowerment across five domains. Objective: Examine the association between patient empowerment levels and patient-prioritized health education topics among adults with CHD. Methods: This cross-sectional study included adults (≥18) with self-reported CHD enrolled in the Empower My Congenital Heart digital study. Participants completed the GES survey and responded to open-ended questions regarding information of interest to them in managing their healthcare. GES scores were divided into tertiles, and responses were grouped into patient-prioritized topics. Descriptive analysis examined associations between empowerment levels and topic preferences. Results: Of 292 eligible patients, mean age was 45.6 ± 14.7 years, 91.4% were Caucasian, and 66.4% were female. The median (25th, 75th) GES score was 62 (57, 68). The most frequently observed patient prioritized topic was CHD health knowledge (73%), followed by interest in building CHD community (52.7%), lifestyle management (23.6%), health care navigation (7.2%), research and representation (5.1%). Participants in the lower and middle GES tertiles more frequently expressed interest in foundational sub-topics such as understanding CHD and surgical history, finding ACHD specialists, exercise and nutrition. In contrast, participants in the highest GES tertile prioritized sub-topics related to aging with CHD, managing menopause, CHD research and legislative activities. Peer support was a common topic across all groups (Figure 1). Patient quotes were stratified by tertile and patient prioritized health topics and subtopics as summarized in table 1. Conclusion: Adults with CHD prioritized varied health education topics depending on their baseline empowerment levels. Those with lower GES scores prioritized foundational information and guidance, while those with higher scores prioritized community-oriented and research-related topics. These findings could help tailor CHD patient-centered education strategies based on individual empowerment profiles.

Background: Digital health offers a potential solution to support adults with congenital heart disease (CHD), filling the critical gap to help maintain recommended lifelong care with adult CHD specialists. However, its design and implementation require a rigorous scientific approach to make it scalable and usable for the target population. Objective: To pilot test the acceptability and feasibility of a digital health intervention to support lifelong healthcare for adults with CHD. Methods: Using a community-based participatory research and a behavioral theory-based approach, we developed and piloted a digital tool, Empower My Congenital Heart (EmpowerMyCH), within the web—and mobile-based Eureka Digital Research platform at UCSF. Intervention components within EmpowerMyCH include exhibits (expert and peer-developed learning modules on CHD-related topics such as finding specialists or navigating visits, tests, procedures, etc.), peer support, and a digital medical passport (Figure 1). Participants receive an exhibit with study measure surveys every two months, with a two-month completion window. Participant satisfaction with the digital tool is measured at six months using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8), a validated survey with scores ranging from 8 to 32; higher scores indicate higher satisfaction with the digital tool. Results: Of the 519 participants recruited, 495 were eligible adults with CHD, 445 consented, and 6 withdrew. The median age was 43 (ranging from 20 to 85) years, and 30.1% were males. Survey completion rate was the highest at 88.7% during the first two months after enrollment and 53.5% at 8 months. Of the five exhibits delivered so far, over 87% of participants rated the exhibits to be helpful (Figure 2). Participants found the exhibits readable, easily accessible, motivational, useful, and educational (Figure 3). The median (25th, 75th) CSQ-8 score was 21 (18, 25) among 144 participants who completed the survey. Conclusions: EmpowerMyCH, the digital health tool, appears to be acceptable to most adults with CHD to support and educate them in navigating their healthcare. The tool and its contents are accessible, user-friendly, and responsive to the needs of the CHD community, resulting in high satisfaction rates. The feasibility rates and satisfaction scores are similar to or higher for EmpowerMyCH than those of prior digital health studies. Future hybrid intervention trials can demonstrate EmpowerMyCH‘s effectiveness.

Background: It is currently unknown whether patient engagement in adult congenital heart disease (CHD) care is influenced by social determinants of health (SDOH) such as race/ethnicity, education, and income. Adapting from the chronic care model, patient engagement, defined as the knowledge, skills, ability, and willingness to manage one’s health, can minimize lapses in care and improve CHD care outcomes. Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzes data from patients aged 18 and older with a self-reported diagnosis of CHD enrolled in a digital health research study called Empower My Congenital Heart. Patient engagement was measured using the Gothenburg Empowerment Scale (GES). We compared mean GES scores across demographic categories (race/ethnicity, education, and income), using independent samples t-tests or one-way ANOVA as appropriate. Additionally, we conducted a multivariate linear regression analysis to evaluate the impact of race/ethnicity, education, and income on GES scores, adjusting for age, gender, marital status, parental status, and employment status. Results: Of 323 adult CHD patients, the mean age was 45.6 ±15 years, 32.5% were males, 89.9% were non-Hispanic White, 29.7% had less than a Bachelor's degree, and 43.5% had less than $100,000 annual household income. The mean GES score was 61.8 ± 8, with significantly higher scores observed for non-Hispanic White identifying individuals (p=0.006) and those with a Bachelor's or higher level of education (p=0.005), while no difference across income levels (p = 0.394) (Figure 1). Linear regression analysis demonstrated that race and ethnicity remained significantly associated with GES scores (Table 1). Conclusions: Race/ethnicity and education level (in the bivariate analysis only), but not income, are the SDOH variables significantly associated with how empowered a CHD patient is in managing their health care. Future interventions that target enhancing patient engagement and self-management skills should take into consideration the influence of these demographic and social factors.

Abstract Background Adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) frequently experience gaps in lifelong ACHD specialty care, leading to preventable complications, hospitalizations, and premature mortality. However, effective, scalable, accessible, and sustainable strategies to reduce these gaps are lacking. Digital health offers potential solutions but requires a rigorous scientific approach in its design to address the needs of the target population. Objective To describe the development of a theory-based, community co-designed digital health intervention to improve lifelong ACHD care. Methods We integrated theory-based behavioral frameworks, semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients and clinicians, and a community-engaged approach to develop a digital health intervention for ACHD. The primary behavioral target was completing an ACHD specialist appointment. We conducted Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior (COM-B)-guided semi-structured interviews with ACHD patients and clinicians to identify barriers to specialized care amenable to a digital intervention and patient-centered goals for the digital tool. The community partners helped develop key intervention objectives, create a theory-driven framework, and specify how each intervention component targets specific COM-B barriers. Results We interviewed 54 participants (37 ACHD patients and 17 clinicians) and engaged 21 community partners representing 4 advocacy organizations. Design objectives emphasized addressing patient loneliness, ensuring accessibility and credibility, and enabling scalability while centering patient perspectives. Participants identified four priorities: providing credible resources, uplifting patient voices, customizing to patient needs, and centering positivity and joy. The digital tool, named by community partners as Empower My Congenital Heart (EMCH), was designed within the web- and mobile-based, Apple- and Android-compatible, Eureka Digital Research platform (University of California, San Francisco). Key intervention components included educational modules, peer support, appointment planning nudges, and a digital medical passport. The EMCH’s theory-driven framework specifies how each intervention component targets specific COM-B barriers to specialized ACHD care. Conclusions The theory-driven, community co-designed EMCH digital tool is a rapidly scalable approach to improve guideline-recommended specialized ACHD care. Future studies will evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, effectiveness, and implementation outcomes to provide insight into a novel tool to reduce preventable morbidity and mortality in ACHD. Trial Registration The National Clinical Trial number for this study is NCT06581484 .

Care and outcomes for the more than 40,000 patients undergoing pediatric and congenital heart surgery in the United States annually are known to vary widely. While consensus recommendations have been published across numerous fields as one mechanism to promote a high level of care delivery across centers, it has been more than two decades since the last pediatric heart surgery recommendations were published in the United States. More recent guidance is lacking, and collaborative efforts involving the many disciplines engaged in caring for these children have not been undertaken to date. The present initiative brings together professional societies spanning numerous care domains and congenital cardiac surgeons, pediatric cardiologists, nursing, and other healthcare professionals from diverse programs around the country to develop consensus recommendations for United States centers. The focus of this initial work is on pediatric heart surgery, and it is recommended that future efforts focus in detail on the adult congenital population. We describe the background, rationale, and methodology related to this collaborative effort, and recommendations put forth for Essential Care Centers (essential services necessary for any program), and Comprehensive Care Centers (services to optimize comprehensive and high-complexity care), encompassing structure, process, and outcome metrics across 14 domains.