Clinically important differences in health status for patients with heart disease: An expert consensus panel report

被引:100
作者
Wyrwich, KW
Spertus, JA
Kroenke, K
Tierney, WM
Babu, AN
Wolinsky, FD
机构
[1] St Louis Univ, Dept Res Methodol, St Louis, MO 63103 USA
[2] St Louis Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, St Louis, MO 63103 USA
[3] St Lukes Hosp, Mid Amer Heart Inst, Kansas City, MO 64111 USA
[4] Univ Missouri, Kansas City, MO 64110 USA
[5] Regenstrief Inst Hlth Care, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[6] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Indianapolis, IN USA
[7] Richard L Roudebush Vet Adm Med Ctr, Indianapolis, IN USA
[8] Vet Adm Med Ctr, St Louis, MO USA
[9] St Louis Univ, Sch Med, St Louis, MO USA
[10] Univ Iowa, Coll Publ Hlth, Iowa City, IA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.ahj.2003.10.039
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background The purpose of the study was to develop clinically important difference (CID) standards for patients with coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure that identify small, moderate, and large intraindividual changes with time in a modified version of the Chronic Heart Failure Questionnaire (CHQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36, version 2). Prior work in ascertaining important difference standards for the CHQ have centered on patient-perceived changes. No important difference standards for the SF-36 have been published for patients with heart disease. This development of CIDs would facilitate the use of health status measures in daily clinical decision-making. Methods We used a modification of the RAND Appropriateness Method to assemble and guide a 9-member consensus panel of physicians with substantial experience in using the CHQ or the SF-36 among patients with heart disease. Results On the basis of their own experience using these measures and an extensive review of articles describing the development and use of these instruments, the expert panel achieved consensus on small, medium, and large clinically relevant changes in scores for the CHQ and SF-36. The CID standards established by this panel were slightly higher than the minimal important difference standards previously established for the CHQ using patient-perceived changes. Conclusions The CID standards established by this expert panel provide an important and useful tool for determining whether routine clinical health status assessments will benefit patients and enhance physicians' decision-making capacity in clinical settings.
引用
收藏
页码:615 / 622
页数:8
相关论文
共 40 条
[31]  
Taenzer PA, 1997, CANCER PRACT, V5, P168
[32]   FORCES MOTIVATING THE USE OF HEALTH-STATUS ASSESSMENT MEASURES IN CLINICAL SETTINGS AND RELATED CLINICAL RESEARCH [J].
THIER, SO .
MEDICAL CARE, 1992, 30 (05) :MS15-MS22
[33]  
Tierney W. M., 1999, JGIM, V14, P125
[34]   Computer-based quality of life questionnaires may contribute to doctor-patient interactions in oncology [J].
Velikova, G ;
Brown, JM ;
Smith, AB ;
Selby, P .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2002, 86 (01) :51-59
[35]  
Walker J., 2002, Practical Diabetes International, V19, P141, DOI 10.1002/pdi.348
[36]  
Ware J.E., 2003, SF 36 HLTH SURVEY MA
[37]  
Wasson J, 1992, Qual Life Res, V1, P99, DOI 10.1007/BF00439717
[38]  
Wasson J H, 1999, Eff Clin Pract, V2, P1
[39]   Generic versus disease-specific health status measures - An example using coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure patients [J].
Wolinsky, FD ;
Wyrwich, KW ;
Nienaber, NA ;
Tierney, WM .
EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, 1998, 21 (02) :216-243
[40]   Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life [J].
Wyrwich, KW ;
Nienaber, NA ;
Tierney, WM ;
Wolinsky, FD .
MEDICAL CARE, 1999, 37 (05) :469-478