心力衰竭患者报告结果评估:系统性综述

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart Failure Reviews Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.1007/s10741-024-10404-y
João Lázaro Mendes, Cristina Mendes dos Santos, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto
{"title":"心力衰竭患者报告结果评估:系统性综述","authors":"João Lázaro Mendes, Cristina Mendes dos Santos, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto","doi":"10.1007/s10741-024-10404-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent global disease, particularly impacting developed countries. With the world’s aging population, HF’s impact on the quantity and quality of life is expected to grow. This review aims to ascertain the frequency, characteristics, and properties of all patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) studied in HF patients. We searched Ovid/Medline and Web of Science for original articles about PROMs performed in adults with HF. Using pre-established quality criteria for measurement properties, an overall rating was assigned to evaluate and compare different instruments. The quality of evidence was assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. Of 4283 records identified, we reviewed 296 full-text documents and included 64 papers, involving 30,185 participants. Thirty different PROMs were identified, with 14 specifically designed for HF being the most commonly used. Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) were evaluated 16 and 13 times, respectively, demonstrating good psychometric properties. The MacNew Heart Disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, a common heart disease-specific instrument, exhibited negative performances across various psychometric measures. Evidence for generic instruments was scant and unremarkable and they proved to be less responsive in HF populations. MLHF and KCCQ emerged as the most commonly used and well-supported PROMs, with robust overall evidence. They are comprehensive and accurate instruments, particularly suitable for application in clinical practice and research. Future research should explore how computer-adapted instruments can enhance precision, reduce respondent burden, and improve communication between clinicians and patients, thereby promoting more efficient and patient-centered services.</p>","PeriodicalId":12950,"journal":{"name":"Heart Failure Reviews","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of patient-reported outcomes measures in heart failure: a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"João Lázaro Mendes, Cristina Mendes dos Santos, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10741-024-10404-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent global disease, particularly impacting developed countries. With the world’s aging population, HF’s impact on the quantity and quality of life is expected to grow. This review aims to ascertain the frequency, characteristics, and properties of all patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) studied in HF patients. We searched Ovid/Medline and Web of Science for original articles about PROMs performed in adults with HF. Using pre-established quality criteria for measurement properties, an overall rating was assigned to evaluate and compare different instruments. The quality of evidence was assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. Of 4283 records identified, we reviewed 296 full-text documents and included 64 papers, involving 30,185 participants. Thirty different PROMs were identified, with 14 specifically designed for HF being the most commonly used. Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) were evaluated 16 and 13 times, respectively, demonstrating good psychometric properties. The MacNew Heart Disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, a common heart disease-specific instrument, exhibited negative performances across various psychometric measures. Evidence for generic instruments was scant and unremarkable and they proved to be less responsive in HF populations. MLHF and KCCQ emerged as the most commonly used and well-supported PROMs, with robust overall evidence. They are comprehensive and accurate instruments, particularly suitable for application in clinical practice and research. Future research should explore how computer-adapted instruments can enhance precision, reduce respondent burden, and improve communication between clinicians and patients, thereby promoting more efficient and patient-centered services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12950,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart Failure Reviews\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart Failure Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-024-10404-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Failure Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-024-10404-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

心力衰竭(HF)是一种全球流行的疾病,对发达国家的影响尤为严重。随着世界人口老龄化的加剧,预计心力衰竭对生活质量和数量的影响将越来越大。本综述旨在确定对心房颤动患者进行研究的所有患者报告结果测量(PROMs)的频率、特点和属性。我们在 Ovid/Medline 和 Web of Science 上搜索了有关在成人高血压患者中开展的 PROMs 的原始文章。采用预先确定的测量特性质量标准,对不同的测量工具进行评估和比较。证据质量采用 COSMIN 偏倚风险检查表进行评估。在确定的 4283 条记录中,我们审查了 296 篇全文文件,收录了 64 篇论文,涉及 30185 名参与者。我们发现了 30 种不同的 PROM,其中最常用的是 14 种专为心力衰竭设计的 PROM。明尼苏达心力衰竭患者生活问卷(MLHF)和堪萨斯城心肌病问卷(KCCQ)分别被评估了 16 次和 13 次,显示出良好的心理测量特性。MacNew 心脏病健康相关生活质量问卷是一种常见的心脏病特异性工具,在各种心理测量中表现出负面表现。通用工具的证据很少且不显著,事实证明它们对高频人群的反应较差。MLHF和KCCQ是最常用、支持度最高的PROM,总体证据充分。它们是全面而准确的工具,尤其适合应用于临床实践和研究。未来的研究应探讨计算机改编的工具如何提高精确度、减轻答卷人的负担并改善临床医生与患者之间的沟通,从而促进更高效和以患者为中心的服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of patient-reported outcomes measures in heart failure: a systematic review

Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent global disease, particularly impacting developed countries. With the world’s aging population, HF’s impact on the quantity and quality of life is expected to grow. This review aims to ascertain the frequency, characteristics, and properties of all patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) studied in HF patients. We searched Ovid/Medline and Web of Science for original articles about PROMs performed in adults with HF. Using pre-established quality criteria for measurement properties, an overall rating was assigned to evaluate and compare different instruments. The quality of evidence was assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. Of 4283 records identified, we reviewed 296 full-text documents and included 64 papers, involving 30,185 participants. Thirty different PROMs were identified, with 14 specifically designed for HF being the most commonly used. Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) were evaluated 16 and 13 times, respectively, demonstrating good psychometric properties. The MacNew Heart Disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, a common heart disease-specific instrument, exhibited negative performances across various psychometric measures. Evidence for generic instruments was scant and unremarkable and they proved to be less responsive in HF populations. MLHF and KCCQ emerged as the most commonly used and well-supported PROMs, with robust overall evidence. They are comprehensive and accurate instruments, particularly suitable for application in clinical practice and research. Future research should explore how computer-adapted instruments can enhance precision, reduce respondent burden, and improve communication between clinicians and patients, thereby promoting more efficient and patient-centered services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Heart Failure Reviews
Heart Failure Reviews 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
2.20%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart Failure Reviews is an international journal which develops links between basic scientists and clinical investigators, creating a unique, interdisciplinary dialogue focused on heart failure, its pathogenesis and treatment. The journal accordingly publishes papers in both basic and clinical research fields. Topics covered include clinical and surgical approaches to therapy, basic pharmacology, biochemistry, molecular biology, pathology, and electrophysiology. The reviews are comprehensive, expanding the reader''s knowledge base and awareness of current research and new findings in this rapidly growing field of cardiovascular medicine. All reviews are thoroughly peer-reviewed before publication.
期刊最新文献
Could SGLT2 inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure and significant valvular heart disease? Need for action. Maternal heart failure: state-of-the-art review. Diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: European vs. American guidelines. Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in left ventricular assist device and heart transplant recipients: a mini-review. The road to renal denervation for hypertension and beyond (HF): two decades of failed, succeeded, and to be determined.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1