Comparing Measures to Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

• DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.02.006
• Publication Date: 2018-06-06T18:58:15Z
• Authors: Rebecca Napier; Steven E. McNulty; David T. Eton; Margaret M. Redfield; Omar AbouEzzeddine; Shannon M. Dunlay
• Keywords: Heart Failure; Male; 2. Zero hunger; Cross-Over Studies; Health Status; Reproducibility of Results; Stroke Volume; Middle Aged; 3. Good health; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Double-Blind Method; Surveys and Questionnaires; Quality of Life; Health Status Indicators; Humans; Female; Aged

This study sought to compare the performance of 2 health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).The ability to accurately assess HRQOL over time is important in the care of patients with heart failure. The validity and reliability of HRQOL tools including the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) has not been fully determined or compared in patients with HFpEF.Among patients with stable chronic HFpEF enrolled in the NEAT (Nitrate Effect on Activity Tolerance in Heart Failure) trial (n = 110), the study evaluated and compared reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change of the MLHFQ and KCCQ at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks.Internal consistency was good and comparable for MLHFQ and KCCQ domains measuring similar aspects of HRQOL at baseline including the MLHFQ physical (Cronbach's α = 0.93) compared with the KCCQ clinical summary (α = 0.91), and the MLHFQ emotional (α = 0.92) compared with the KCCQ quality of life (α = 0.87). Correlations with New York Heart Association functional class (Spearman rho; rs= -0.37 vs. 0.30) and 6-min walk test (6MWT) (rs = 0.38 vs. -0.23) at baseline were slightly stronger for the KCCQ overall summary score than for the MLHFQ total score. The MLHFQ was more responsive to change in 6MWT based on responsiveness statistics.These data suggest that both the MLHFQ and KCCQ are reliable and valid tools to assess HRQOL in HFpEF. The KCCQ was more strongly correlated with baseline functional status parameters, while the MLHFQ was more responsive to improvement in 6MWT.