Does heart failure-specific health status identify patients with bothersome symptoms, depression, anxiety, and/or poorer spiritual well-being?

Flint KM, Fairclough DL, Spertus JA, Bekelman DB. Does heart failure-specific health status identify patients with bothersome symptoms, depression, anxiety, and/or poorer spiritual well-being? European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes. 2019 Jul 1; 5(3):233-241.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

AIMS: Patients with heart failure often have under-recognized symptoms, depression, anxiety, and poorer spiritual well-being (''QoL domains''). Ideally all patients should have heart failure-specific health status and quality of life (QoL) domains routinely evaluated; however, lack of time and resources are limiting in most clinical settings. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether heart failure-specific health status was associated with QoL domains and to identify a score warranting further evaluation of QoL domain deficits. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants (N? = 314) enrolled in the Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness trial completed measures of heart failure-specific health status [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, KCCQ (score 0-100, 0? = worst health status)], additional symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), and spiritual well-being (Facit-Sp) at baseline. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) KCCQ score was 46.9?±?19.3, mean age was 65.5 ± 11.4, and 79% were male. Prevalence of QoL domain deficits ranged from 11% (nausea) to 47% (depression). Sensitivity/specificity of KCCQ for each QoL domain ranged from 20-40%/80-96% for KCCQ? = 25, 61-84%/48-62% for KCCQ? = 50, 84-97%/26-40% for KCCQ? = 60, and 96-100%/8-13% for KCCQ? = 75. Patients with KCCQ? = 60 had mean ± SD 4.5?±?2.5 QoL domain deficits (maximum 12), vs. 1.6?±?1.6 for KCCQ? > 60 (P? < 0.001). Similar results were seen for KCCQ = 25 (6.6?±?2.4 vs. 3.3?±?2.4), KCCQ? = 50 (4.8?±?2.6 vs. 2.5?±?2) and KCCQ? = 75 (4.0?±?2.6 vs. 1.0?±?1.2) (all P? < 00001). CONCLUSION: KCCQ? = 60 had good sensitivity for each QoL domain deficit and for patients with at least one QoL domain deficit. Screening for QoL domain deficits should target patients with lower KCCQ scores based on a clinic''s KCCQ score distribution and clinical resources for addressing QoL domain deficits.