The Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire: sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population [corrected] [published erratum appears in NURS RES 2002 Sep-Oct;51(5):291].
BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (LHFQ) is a commonly used measure of health-related quality of life in persons with heart failure. Researchers have questioned whether LHFQ is sensitive to subtle differences and sufficiently responsive to clinical interventions becau...
| Publicado en: | Nursing Research Vol. 51; no. 4; pp. 209 - 219 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Formato: | algorithm research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2002 Jul-Aug
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106956172&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106956172 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 00296562 1HA jtl: Nursing Research issn: 00296562 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2002 Jul-Aug vid: 51 iid: 4 pid: 433 pub: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins place: Baltimore, Maryland artinfo: ui: 106956172 106956172 2002110204 10.1097/00006199-200207000-00001 NLM12131233 106956172 ppf: 209 ppct: 10 formats: tig: atl: The Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire: sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population [corrected] [published erratum appears in NURS RES 2002 Sep-Oct;51(5):291]. aug: au: Riegel B Moser DK Glaser D Carlson B Deaton C Armola R Sethares K Shively M Evangelista L Albert N affil: School of Nursing, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182-4158; briegel@mail.sdsu.edu sug: subj: Heart Failure Psychosocial Factors Quality of Life Instrument Validation Questionnaires Funding Source Secondary Analysis Experimental Studies Quasi-Experimental Studies Convenience Sample Descriptive Statistics Severity of Illness Validation Studies Conceptual Framework Sensitivity and Specificity Prospective Studies United States Multivariate Analysis of Variance Severity of Illness Indices Coding Data Analysis Software Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance Coefficient alpha Clinical Trials Adult Middle Age Aged Aged, 80 and Over Male Female Human Adult: 19-44 years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Aged: 65+ years Aged, 80 & over Male Female ab: BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (LHFQ) is a commonly used measure of health-related quality of life in persons with heart failure. Researchers have questioned whether LHFQ is sensitive to subtle differences and sufficiently responsive to clinical interventions because the instrument has demonstrated variable performance in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: A secondary analysis was conducted to assess the LHFQ for sensitivity to different clinical states and responsiveness to varying intensities of clinical intervention. METHODS: A convenience sample of nine experimental or quasi-experimental studies from eight clinical sites in the United States yielded data from 1,136 patients with heart failure. Data in the studies had been collected at enrollment and one, three, and/or six months later. Data were analyzed using descriptive, univariate, and multivariate techniques. RESULTS: Total and subscale scores on LHFQ were poorer in those with worse New York Heart Association functional class, although there was no difference in LHFQ scores between classes III and IV. No difference in LHFQ scores was found when patients were classified by ejection fraction. Scores improved significantly following hospital discharge, even in those in the control group. Changes in LHFQ scores were greatest in those receiving high intensity interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The LHFQ is sensitive to major differences in symptom severity but may not be sensitive to subtle differences. It is responsive to high intensity interventions. Investigators are cautioned against using this instrument without first maximizing intervention power or without a control group for comparison. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: algorithm research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|