The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire: Sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population

Barbara Riegel, Debra K. Moser, Dale Glaser, Beverly Carlson, Christi Deaton, Rochelle Armola, Kristen Sethares, Martha Shively, Lorraine Evangelista, Nancy Albert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

109 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)209-218
Number of pages10
JournalNursing Research
Volume51
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Heart Failure
Population
Research Personnel
Surveys and Questionnaires
Control Groups
Quality of Life
Clinical Trials

Keywords

  • Clinical sensitivity
  • Dose-response analysis
  • Heart failure
  • Instrument
  • Measurement
  • Responsiveness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire : Sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population. / Riegel, Barbara; Moser, Debra K.; Glaser, Dale; Carlson, Beverly; Deaton, Christi; Armola, Rochelle; Sethares, Kristen; Shively, Martha; Evangelista, Lorraine; Albert, Nancy.

In: Nursing Research, Vol. 51, No. 4, 01.01.2002, p. 209-218.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Riegel, Barbara ; Moser, Debra K. ; Glaser, Dale ; Carlson, Beverly ; Deaton, Christi ; Armola, Rochelle ; Sethares, Kristen ; Shively, Martha ; Evangelista, Lorraine ; Albert, Nancy. / The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire : Sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population. In: Nursing Research. 2002 ; Vol. 51, No. 4. pp. 209-218.
@article{702ae361f756495eaca0e348d1284217,
title = "The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire: Sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Clinical sensitivity, Dose-response analysis, Heart failure, Instrument, Measurement, Responsiveness",
author = "Barbara Riegel and Moser, {Debra K.} and Dale Glaser and Beverly Carlson and Christi Deaton and Rochelle Armola and Kristen Sethares and Martha Shively and Lorraine Evangelista and Nancy Albert",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00006199-200207000-00001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "209--218",
journal = "Nursing Research",
issn = "0029-6562",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire

T2 - Sensitivity to differences and responsiveness to intervention intensity in a clinical population

AU - Riegel, Barbara

AU - Moser, Debra K.

AU - Glaser, Dale

AU - Carlson, Beverly

AU - Deaton, Christi

AU - Armola, Rochelle

AU - Sethares, Kristen

AU - Shively, Martha

AU - Evangelista, Lorraine

AU - Albert, Nancy

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - 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.

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.

KW - Clinical sensitivity

KW - Dose-response analysis

KW - Heart failure

KW - Instrument

KW - Measurement

KW - Responsiveness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036635323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036635323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00006199-200207000-00001

DO - 10.1097/00006199-200207000-00001

M3 - Article

C2 - 12131233

AN - SCOPUS:0036635323

VL - 51

SP - 209

EP - 218

JO - Nursing Research

JF - Nursing Research

SN - 0029-6562

IS - 4

ER -