scholarly journals How to evaluate Quality of Life

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Porcu ◽  
Antonella Mandas
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Technological Progress ◽  
Objective Evaluation ◽  
Medical Intervention ◽  
Social Health ◽  
Clinical Parameters ◽  
Medical Terminology ◽  
High Prevalence

In medical terminology, it has become more and more common the use of the expression “Quality of Life” (QoL) to define a series of aspects that go beyond the traditional, clinical and “objective” evaluation of the medical intervention. The attention to QoL comes from the need to find tools that are able to reveal important aspects of the life of the patient that cannot be measured by a laboratory exam and/or a radiological procedure. The QoL is measured through multidimensional questionnaires on, at the very least, the domains of physical, psychological and social health. The improvement of the health care standards and the technological progress in medical matters have brought about an increase in the average age of the population, and as a consequence, an increase of the chronic and degenerative disease, which can negatively influence the patient’s quality of life. Amongst these pathologies, heart failure (HF) has a high prevalence in patients who are at least 70 years old, and it’s the cause of frequent and repeated hospitalizations. The estimate of the QoL becomes then a very important piece of the puzzle to figure out, as important as the clinical parameters, to allow the patient to become an integral part of the physician’s decisions and to reach more quickly and with better results the therapeutic objectives.

scholarly journals Frailty in patients with heart failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_L) ◽  
pp. L12-L16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiana Vitale ◽  
Izabella Uchmanowicz
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
Adverse Impact ◽  
Chronological Age ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The importance of frailty in heart failure (HF) patients has been increasingly recognized because of its high prevalence and its significantly adverse impact on prognosis and quality of life. Due to the impact of frailty on both prognosis and treatment of HF patients, all patients with HF, regardless of their chronological age, should be evaluated for the presence of, or the risk for developing frailty. However, although several instruments are available, there is still no consensus as to which is the best method to assess frailty in patients with HF. Therefore, a validated and easy to apply instrument to assess frailty in HF patients in daily practice is warranted.

The relationship between clinical parameters and natriuretic peptides and quality of life in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Sawczak ◽  
A Kukfisz ◽  
K Przytarska ◽  
M Szczechla ◽  
H Krysztofiak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Natriuretic Peptides ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Clinical Parameters ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Heart failure (HF) patients are exposed to severe symptoms of the disease, fatal prognosis, rehospitalizations and low quality of life status. Furthermore, it was observed that more patients with HF would rather live better than longer. Purpose The aim of the study was to determine the relationship between clinical parameters, natriuretic peptides level and quality of life (QoL) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Methods 111 patients hospitalized due to heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were examined using WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire and divided into three groups of similar quantity due to their transformed score of somatic domain of QoL: first group with score <45 - worst QoL (n = 33), second group with score between 45 and 55 (n = 42), and third with score >55 - best QoL (n = 36). Then the group with highest scores, with best somatic QoL, was compared with those with lowest scores in respect of chosen clinical and biochemical parameters. Results Patients with the highest somatic domain score, comparing with the lowest, had significantly higher BMI (mean 29.8 ± 5.5 vs. 26.8 ± 5.7 kg/m2, p = 0.016), lower BNP level (465 vs. 967 pg/ml, median 275 vs. 690, p =0.005), higher LVEF (30.7 ± 12.0 vs. 23.9 ± 10.8%, p = 0.006), higher triglycerides level (2.02 ± 1.22 vs. 1.43 ± 0.76 mmol/l, p = 0.027) and iron level (17.8 ± 6.6 vs. 13.6 ± 5.5 µmol/l, p = 0.019) as well as transferrin saturation (28.0 ± 11.0 vs. 21.3 ± 8.9 %, p = 0.015). The percentage of patients with NYHA class I and II was higher in the group with the highest somatic domain score in comparison with the lowest (66.6% vs. 33.3% respectively, p = 0.034). Conclusions The somatic domain of WHOQOL-BREF in patients with HFrEF correlates with patients’ clinical state assessed with the NYHA class and BNP level. QoL status was not associated with age and gender which are depicted in the literature as the important aspects influencing QoL of the community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document