Predictive value of quality of life as measured by KCCQ in heart failure patients: A meta-analysis

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Guoying Kao, Gang Xu, Ying Zhang, Chuanwei Li, Jun Xiao
{"title":"Predictive value of quality of life as measured by KCCQ in heart failure patients: A meta-analysis","authors":"Guoying Kao,&nbsp;Gang Xu,&nbsp;Ying Zhang,&nbsp;Chuanwei Li,&nbsp;Jun Xiao","doi":"10.1111/eci.14233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Studies on the predictive ability of disease-specific health quality of life (QoL) in patients with heart failure (HF) have produced conflicting results. To address these gaps in knowledge, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the predictive value of QoL measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in patients with HF.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched PubMed, and Embase databases to identify studies investigating the predictive utility of baseline QoL measured by the KCCQ in HF patients. The outcome measures were all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation. The predictive value of QoL was expressed by pooling the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the bottom versus the top category of KCCQ score or for per 10-point KCCQ score decrease.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twelve studies reporting on 11 articles with a total of 34,927 HF patients were identified. Comparison of the bottom with the top KCCQ score, the pooled adjusted HR was 2.34 (95% CI 2.10–2.60) and 2.53 (95% CI 2.23–2.88) for all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation, respectively. Additionally, a 10-point decrease in KCCQ score was associated with a 12% (95% CI 7%–16%) increased risk of all-cause mortality and a 14% (95% CI 13%–15%) increased risk of HF hospitalisation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Poor health-related QoL as determined by the lower KCCQ score, was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation in patients with HF. Measuring disease-specific health-related QoL using the KCCQ score may provide valuable predictive information for HF patients.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.14233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Studies on the predictive ability of disease-specific health quality of life (QoL) in patients with heart failure (HF) have produced conflicting results. To address these gaps in knowledge, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the predictive value of QoL measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in patients with HF.

Materials and Methods

We searched PubMed, and Embase databases to identify studies investigating the predictive utility of baseline QoL measured by the KCCQ in HF patients. The outcome measures were all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation. The predictive value of QoL was expressed by pooling the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the bottom versus the top category of KCCQ score or for per 10-point KCCQ score decrease.

Results

Twelve studies reporting on 11 articles with a total of 34,927 HF patients were identified. Comparison of the bottom with the top KCCQ score, the pooled adjusted HR was 2.34 (95% CI 2.10–2.60) and 2.53 (95% CI 2.23–2.88) for all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation, respectively. Additionally, a 10-point decrease in KCCQ score was associated with a 12% (95% CI 7%–16%) increased risk of all-cause mortality and a 14% (95% CI 13%–15%) increased risk of HF hospitalisation.

Conclusions

Poor health-related QoL as determined by the lower KCCQ score, was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalisation in patients with HF. Measuring disease-specific health-related QoL using the KCCQ score may provide valuable predictive information for HF patients.

Abstract Image

KCCQ 对心力衰竭患者生活质量的预测价值:荟萃分析
背景关于心力衰竭(HF)患者疾病特异性健康生活质量(QoL)预测能力的研究结果相互矛盾。为了填补这些知识空白,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估堪萨斯城心肌病问卷(KCCQ)对心力衰竭患者 QoL 的预测价值。结果指标为全因死亡率和高血压住院率。QoL的预测价值通过汇总KCCQ得分最低与最高类别的调整后危险比(HRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)或KCCQ得分每降低10分的调整后危险比(HRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)来表示。将 KCCQ 评分从低到高进行比较,汇总调整后的全因死亡率和心房颤动住院率分别为 2.34 (95% CI 2.10-2.60) 和 2.53 (95% CI 2.23-2.88)。此外,KCCQ评分每降低10分,全因死亡风险增加12%(95% CI 7%-16%),HF住院风险增加14%(95% CI 13%-15%)。使用KCCQ评分测量疾病特异性健康相关生活质量可为高血压患者提供有价值的预测信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.60%
发文量
192
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信