Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure

Objective: The objectives of this study are to (1) Address issues related to selecting a quality of life (QOL) measuring tool; and (2) Present data from a pilot test comparing 3 QOL tools (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36], the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [LHFQ], and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart & lung 2001-09, Vol.30 (5), p.332-340
Hauptverfasser: Sneed, Nancee V., Paul, Sara, Michel, Yvonne, VanBakel, Adrian, Hendrix, Grady
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 340
container_issue 5
container_start_page 332
container_title Heart & lung
container_volume 30
creator Sneed, Nancee V.
Paul, Sara
Michel, Yvonne
VanBakel, Adrian
Hendrix, Grady
description Objective: The objectives of this study are to (1) Address issues related to selecting a quality of life (QOL) measuring tool; and (2) Present data from a pilot test comparing 3 QOL tools (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36], the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [LHFQ], and a visual analogue scale). Design: Descriptive comparative. Setting: A Southern university-affiliated tertiary medical center outpatient heart failure clinic. Patients: Thirty adults, randomly selected from those treated in a multidisciplinary, nurse practitioner–managed heart failure clinic. Results: Significant correlations were found among the global or broader measures of QOL (visual analog scale and LHFQ Total score) and the component scores (LHFQ Emotional, LHFQ Physical, SF-36 Mental [MCS], and SF-36 Physical [PCS]), with the only exception being that of the LHFQ Total and the SF-36 PCS. Mental and physical components of QOL were not related within the SF-36 or between the SF-36 PCS and the LHFQ Emotional score. However, the emotional and physical scores were highly and significantly related within the LHFQ and between the SF-36 MCS and the LHFQ Physical score. Conclusions: The SF-36 was better able to differentiate physical and emotional aspects of QOL in this sample. The LHFQ subscales may be less useful in QOL assessment than the total score. (Heart Lung® 2001;30:332-40.)
doi_str_mv 10.1067/mhl.2001.118303
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72205484</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0147956301756130</els_id><sourcerecordid>72205484</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e3944a366056a76d9c728a0da5beb3f84d5f37987322bcf73d7fa9e7304aff2b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE2LFDEQhoMo7rh69ia56K1n89VJ91GW9QMWvCh4C9XpChNJd2aT9Mr-ezPMwJ6sS6jwvC_FQ8h7zvacaXOzHOJeMMb3nA-SyRdkx3thOimG4SXZMa5MN_ZaXpE3pfxhbaQ2r8kV55qp0fQ78vvuEeIGNaSVJk8lfdgghvp0WmLwSBeEsmVccK20phQLDSs9tkD7KPRvqAfqDjmtwdEDQq7UQ4gt8Ja88hALvru81-TXl7uft9-6-x9fv99-vu-cNLJ2KEelQGrNeg1Gz6MzYgA2Qz_hJP2g5t5LMw5GCjE5b-RsPIxoJFPgvZjkNfl07j3m9LBhqXYJxWGMsGLaijVCsF4NqoE3Z9DlVEpGb485LJCfLGf2JNM2mfYk055ltsSHS_U2LTg_8xd7Dfh4AaA4iD7D6kJ55hSXeuxPReOZwybiMWC2xTV_DueQ0VU7p_DfI_4BKXmQhQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72205484</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Sneed, Nancee V. ; Paul, Sara ; Michel, Yvonne ; VanBakel, Adrian ; Hendrix, Grady</creator><creatorcontrib>Sneed, Nancee V. ; Paul, Sara ; Michel, Yvonne ; VanBakel, Adrian ; Hendrix, Grady</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: The objectives of this study are to (1) Address issues related to selecting a quality of life (QOL) measuring tool; and (2) Present data from a pilot test comparing 3 QOL tools (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36], the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [LHFQ], and a visual analogue scale). Design: Descriptive comparative. Setting: A Southern university-affiliated tertiary medical center outpatient heart failure clinic. Patients: Thirty adults, randomly selected from those treated in a multidisciplinary, nurse practitioner–managed heart failure clinic. Results: Significant correlations were found among the global or broader measures of QOL (visual analog scale and LHFQ Total score) and the component scores (LHFQ Emotional, LHFQ Physical, SF-36 Mental [MCS], and SF-36 Physical [PCS]), with the only exception being that of the LHFQ Total and the SF-36 PCS. Mental and physical components of QOL were not related within the SF-36 or between the SF-36 PCS and the LHFQ Emotional score. However, the emotional and physical scores were highly and significantly related within the LHFQ and between the SF-36 MCS and the LHFQ Physical score. Conclusions: The SF-36 was better able to differentiate physical and emotional aspects of QOL in this sample. The LHFQ subscales may be less useful in QOL assessment than the total score. (Heart Lung® 2001;30:332-40.)</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-9563</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-3288</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1067/mhl.2001.118303</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11604975</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HELUAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>St. Louis, MO: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Attitude to Health ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cardiology. Vascular system ; Chronic Disease ; Comorbidity ; Educational Status ; Employment ; Female ; Heart ; Heart Failure - classification ; Heart Failure - drug therapy ; Heart Failure - psychology ; Heart failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, cardiac enlargement ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Pain Measurement ; Pilot Projects ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>Heart &amp; lung, 2001-09, Vol.30 (5), p.332-340</ispartof><rights>2001 Mosby, Inc.</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e3944a366056a76d9c728a0da5beb3f84d5f37987322bcf73d7fa9e7304aff2b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e3944a366056a76d9c728a0da5beb3f84d5f37987322bcf73d7fa9e7304aff2b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147956301756130$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=14136953$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11604975$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sneed, Nancee V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michel, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanBakel, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hendrix, Grady</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure</title><title>Heart &amp; lung</title><addtitle>Heart Lung</addtitle><description>Objective: The objectives of this study are to (1) Address issues related to selecting a quality of life (QOL) measuring tool; and (2) Present data from a pilot test comparing 3 QOL tools (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36], the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [LHFQ], and a visual analogue scale). Design: Descriptive comparative. Setting: A Southern university-affiliated tertiary medical center outpatient heart failure clinic. Patients: Thirty adults, randomly selected from those treated in a multidisciplinary, nurse practitioner–managed heart failure clinic. Results: Significant correlations were found among the global or broader measures of QOL (visual analog scale and LHFQ Total score) and the component scores (LHFQ Emotional, LHFQ Physical, SF-36 Mental [MCS], and SF-36 Physical [PCS]), with the only exception being that of the LHFQ Total and the SF-36 PCS. Mental and physical components of QOL were not related within the SF-36 or between the SF-36 PCS and the LHFQ Emotional score. However, the emotional and physical scores were highly and significantly related within the LHFQ and between the SF-36 MCS and the LHFQ Physical score. Conclusions: The SF-36 was better able to differentiate physical and emotional aspects of QOL in this sample. The LHFQ subscales may be less useful in QOL assessment than the total score. (Heart Lung® 2001;30:332-40.)</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Attitude to Health</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cardiology. Vascular system</subject><subject>Chronic Disease</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Educational Status</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Heart Failure - classification</subject><subject>Heart Failure - drug therapy</subject><subject>Heart Failure - psychology</subject><subject>Heart failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, cardiac enlargement</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Pilot Projects</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0147-9563</issn><issn>1527-3288</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE2LFDEQhoMo7rh69ia56K1n89VJ91GW9QMWvCh4C9XpChNJd2aT9Mr-ezPMwJ6sS6jwvC_FQ8h7zvacaXOzHOJeMMb3nA-SyRdkx3thOimG4SXZMa5MN_ZaXpE3pfxhbaQ2r8kV55qp0fQ78vvuEeIGNaSVJk8lfdgghvp0WmLwSBeEsmVccK20phQLDSs9tkD7KPRvqAfqDjmtwdEDQq7UQ4gt8Ja88hALvru81-TXl7uft9-6-x9fv99-vu-cNLJ2KEelQGrNeg1Gz6MzYgA2Qz_hJP2g5t5LMw5GCjE5b-RsPIxoJFPgvZjkNfl07j3m9LBhqXYJxWGMsGLaijVCsF4NqoE3Z9DlVEpGb485LJCfLGf2JNM2mfYk055ltsSHS_U2LTg_8xd7Dfh4AaA4iD7D6kJ55hSXeuxPReOZwybiMWC2xTV_DueQ0VU7p_DfI_4BKXmQhQ</recordid><startdate>20010901</startdate><enddate>20010901</enddate><creator>Sneed, Nancee V.</creator><creator>Paul, Sara</creator><creator>Michel, Yvonne</creator><creator>VanBakel, Adrian</creator><creator>Hendrix, Grady</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Mosby</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010901</creationdate><title>Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure</title><author>Sneed, Nancee V. ; Paul, Sara ; Michel, Yvonne ; VanBakel, Adrian ; Hendrix, Grady</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-e3944a366056a76d9c728a0da5beb3f84d5f37987322bcf73d7fa9e7304aff2b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Attitude to Health</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cardiology. Vascular system</topic><topic>Chronic Disease</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Educational Status</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Heart Failure - classification</topic><topic>Heart Failure - drug therapy</topic><topic>Heart Failure - psychology</topic><topic>Heart failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, cardiac enlargement</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Pilot Projects</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sneed, Nancee V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paul, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michel, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanBakel, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hendrix, Grady</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Heart &amp; lung</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sneed, Nancee V.</au><au>Paul, Sara</au><au>Michel, Yvonne</au><au>VanBakel, Adrian</au><au>Hendrix, Grady</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure</atitle><jtitle>Heart &amp; lung</jtitle><addtitle>Heart Lung</addtitle><date>2001-09-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>332</spage><epage>340</epage><pages>332-340</pages><issn>0147-9563</issn><eissn>1527-3288</eissn><coden>HELUAI</coden><abstract>Objective: The objectives of this study are to (1) Address issues related to selecting a quality of life (QOL) measuring tool; and (2) Present data from a pilot test comparing 3 QOL tools (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36], the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire [LHFQ], and a visual analogue scale). Design: Descriptive comparative. Setting: A Southern university-affiliated tertiary medical center outpatient heart failure clinic. Patients: Thirty adults, randomly selected from those treated in a multidisciplinary, nurse practitioner–managed heart failure clinic. Results: Significant correlations were found among the global or broader measures of QOL (visual analog scale and LHFQ Total score) and the component scores (LHFQ Emotional, LHFQ Physical, SF-36 Mental [MCS], and SF-36 Physical [PCS]), with the only exception being that of the LHFQ Total and the SF-36 PCS. Mental and physical components of QOL were not related within the SF-36 or between the SF-36 PCS and the LHFQ Emotional score. However, the emotional and physical scores were highly and significantly related within the LHFQ and between the SF-36 MCS and the LHFQ Physical score. Conclusions: The SF-36 was better able to differentiate physical and emotional aspects of QOL in this sample. The LHFQ subscales may be less useful in QOL assessment than the total score. (Heart Lung® 2001;30:332-40.)</abstract><cop>St. Louis, MO</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>11604975</pmid><doi>10.1067/mhl.2001.118303</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0147-9563
ispartof Heart & lung, 2001-09, Vol.30 (5), p.332-340
issn 0147-9563
1527-3288
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72205484
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Attitude to Health
Biological and medical sciences
Cardiology. Vascular system
Chronic Disease
Comorbidity
Educational Status
Employment
Female
Heart
Heart Failure - classification
Heart Failure - drug therapy
Heart Failure - psychology
Heart failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, cardiac enlargement
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Pain Measurement
Pilot Projects
Quality of Life
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Evaluation of 3 quality of life measurement tools in patients with chronic heart failure
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T20%3A06%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%203%20quality%20of%20life%20measurement%20tools%20in%20patients%20with%20chronic%20heart%20failure&rft.jtitle=Heart%20&%20lung&rft.au=Sneed,%20Nancee%20V.&rft.date=2001-09-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=332&rft.epage=340&rft.pages=332-340&rft.issn=0147-9563&rft.eissn=1527-3288&rft.coden=HELUAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1067/mhl.2001.118303&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72205484%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72205484&rft_id=info:pmid/11604975&rft_els_id=S0147956301756130&rfr_iscdi=true