Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire

36Citations
Citations of this article
94Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is one of the most widely used health-related quality of life questionnaires for patients with heart failure (HF). The objective of the present study was to explore the responsiveness of the MLHFQ by estimating the minimal detectable change (MDC) and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in Spain. Methods: Patients hospitalized for HF in the participating hospitals completed the MLHFQ at baseline and 6 months, plus anchor questions at 6 months. To study responsiveness, patients were classified as having "improved", remained "the same" or "worsened", using anchor questions. We used the standardized effect size (SES), and standardized response mean (SRM) to measure the magnitude of the changes scores and calculate the MDC and MCID. Results: Overall, 1211 patients completed the baseline and follow-up questionnaires 6 months after discharge. The mean changes in all MLHFQ domains followed a trend (P < 0.0001) with larger gains in quality of life among patients classified as "improved", smaller gains among those classified as "the same", and losses among those classified as "worsened". The SES and SRM responsiveness parameters in the "improved" group were ≥ 0.80 on nearly all scales. Among patients classified as "worsened", effect sizes were < 0.40, while among patients classified as "the same", the values ranged from 0.24 to 0.52. The MDC ranged from 7.27 to 16.96. The MCID based on patients whose response to the anchor question was "somewhat better", ranged from 3.59 to 19.14 points. Conclusions: All of these results suggest that all domains of the MLHFQ have a good sensitivity to change in the population studied.

References Powered by Scopus

A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation

41132Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A power primer

34258Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure

10906Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Randomized Ablation-Based Rhythm-Control Versus Rate-Control Trial in Patients with Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation: Results from the RAFT-AF trial

110Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with heart failure

72Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Less invasive ventricular reconstruction for ischaemic heart failure

49Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gonzalez-Saenz De Tejada, M., Bilbao, A., Ansola, L., Quirós, R., García-Perez, L., Navarro, G., & Escobar, A. (2019). Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1104-2

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 13

45%

Researcher 10

34%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 14

47%

Nursing and Health Professions 11

37%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3

10%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 2

7%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free