Cargando…

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire

BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is one of the most widely used health-related quality of life questionnaires for patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of the present study was to explore the responsiveness of the MLHFQ by estimating the minimal det...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M., Bilbao, A., Ansola, L., Quirós, R., García-Perez, L., Navarro, G., Escobar, A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376687/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30764842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1104-2
_version_ 1783395609216024576
author Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M.
Bilbao, A.
Ansola, L.
Quirós, R.
García-Perez, L.
Navarro, G.
Escobar, A.
author_facet Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M.
Bilbao, A.
Ansola, L.
Quirós, R.
García-Perez, L.
Navarro, G.
Escobar, A.
author_sort Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is one of the most widely used health-related quality of life questionnaires for patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of the present study was to explore the responsiveness of the MLHFQ by estimating the minimal detectable change (MDC) and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in Spain. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for HF in the participating hospitals completed the MLHFQ at baseline and 6 months, plus anchor questions at 6 months. To study responsiveness, patients were classified as having “improved”, remained “the same” or “worsened”, using anchor questions. We used the standardized effect size (SES), and standardized response mean (SRM) to measure the magnitude of the changes scores and calculate the MDC and MCID. RESULTS: Overall, 1211 patients completed the baseline and follow-up questionnaires 6 months after discharge. The mean changes in all MLHFQ domains followed a trend (P < 0.0001) with larger gains in quality of life among patients classified as “improved”, smaller gains among those classified as “the same”, and losses among those classified as “worsened”. The SES and SRM responsiveness parameters in the “improved” group were ≥ 0.80 on nearly all scales. Among patients classified as “worsened”, effect sizes were < 0.40, while among patients classified as “the same”, the values ranged from 0.24 to 0.52. The MDC ranged from 7.27 to 16.96. The MCID based on patients whose response to the anchor question was “somewhat better”, ranged from 3.59 to 19.14 points. CONCLUSIONS: All of these results suggest that all domains of the MLHFQ have a good sensitivity to change in the population studied.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6376687
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63766872019-02-27 Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M. Bilbao, A. Ansola, L. Quirós, R. García-Perez, L. Navarro, G. Escobar, A. Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is one of the most widely used health-related quality of life questionnaires for patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of the present study was to explore the responsiveness of the MLHFQ by estimating the minimal detectable change (MDC) and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in Spain. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for HF in the participating hospitals completed the MLHFQ at baseline and 6 months, plus anchor questions at 6 months. To study responsiveness, patients were classified as having “improved”, remained “the same” or “worsened”, using anchor questions. We used the standardized effect size (SES), and standardized response mean (SRM) to measure the magnitude of the changes scores and calculate the MDC and MCID. RESULTS: Overall, 1211 patients completed the baseline and follow-up questionnaires 6 months after discharge. The mean changes in all MLHFQ domains followed a trend (P < 0.0001) with larger gains in quality of life among patients classified as “improved”, smaller gains among those classified as “the same”, and losses among those classified as “worsened”. The SES and SRM responsiveness parameters in the “improved” group were ≥ 0.80 on nearly all scales. Among patients classified as “worsened”, effect sizes were < 0.40, while among patients classified as “the same”, the values ranged from 0.24 to 0.52. The MDC ranged from 7.27 to 16.96. The MCID based on patients whose response to the anchor question was “somewhat better”, ranged from 3.59 to 19.14 points. CONCLUSIONS: All of these results suggest that all domains of the MLHFQ have a good sensitivity to change in the population studied. BioMed Central 2019-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6376687/ /pubmed/30764842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1104-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Gonzalez-Saenz de Tejada, M.
Bilbao, A.
Ansola, L.
Quirós, R.
García-Perez, L.
Navarro, G.
Escobar, A.
Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title_full Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title_fullStr Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title_full_unstemmed Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title_short Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
title_sort responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376687/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30764842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1104-2
work_keys_str_mv AT gonzalezsaenzdetejadam responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT bilbaoa responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT ansolal responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT quirosr responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT garciaperezl responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT navarrog responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire
AT escobara responsivenessandminimalclinicallyimportantdifferenceoftheminnesotalivingwithheartfailurequestionnaire