Literature DB >> 34104417

A minimal clinically important difference measured by the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review for patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Katherine Bunclark1, Natalie Doughty1, Alice Michael1, Nisha Abraham1, Samantha Ali1, John E Cannon1, Karen Sheares1, Nicola Speed1, Dolores Taboada1, Mark Toshner1,2, Joanna Pepke-Zaba1.   

Abstract

Several patient-reported outcome measures have been developed to assess health status in pulmonary arterial hypertension. The required change in instrument scores needed, to be seen as meaningful to the individual, however remain unknown. We sought to identify minimal clinically important differences in the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) and to validate these against objective markers of functional capacity. Minimal clinically important differences were established from a discovery cohort (n = 129) of consecutive incident cases of idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension with CAMPHOR scores recorded at treatment-naïve baseline and 4-12 months following pulmonary arterial hypertension therapy. An independent validation cohort (n = 87) was used to verify minimal clinically important differences. Concurrent measures of functional capacity relative to CAMPHOR scores were collected. Minimal clinically important differences were derived using anchor- and distributional-based approaches. In the discovery cohort, mean (SD) was 54.4 (16.4) years and 64% were female. Most patients (63%) were treated with sequential pulmonary arterial hypertension therapy. Baseline CAMPHOR scores were: Symptoms, 12 (7); Activity, 12 (7) and quality of life, 10 (7). Pulmonary arterial hypertension treatment resulted in significant improvements in CAMPHOR scores (p < 0.05). CAMPHOR minimal clinically important differences averaged across methods for health status improvement were: Symptoms, -4 points; Activity, -4 points and quality of life -3 points. CAMPHOR Activity score change ≥minimal clinically important difference was associated with significantly greater improvement in six-minute walk distance, in both discovery and validation populations. In conclusion, CAMPHOR scores are responsive to pulmonary arterial hypertension treatment. Minimal clinically important differences in pulmonary hypertension-specific scales may provide useful insights into treatment response in future clinical trials.
© The Author(s) 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  health outcomes; pulmonary arterial hypertension; quality of life

Year:  2021        PMID: 34104417      PMCID: PMC8149778          DOI: 10.1177/2045894021995055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pulm Circ        ISSN: 2045-8932            Impact factor:   3.017


  44 in total

1.  The minimal important difference in the 6-minute walk test for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Authors:  Stephen C Mathai; Milo A Puhan; Diana Lam; Robert A Wise
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 21.405

2.  The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR): a measure of health-related quality of life and quality of life for patients with pulmonary hypertension.

Authors:  S P McKenna; N Doughty; D M Meads; L C Doward; J Pepke-Zaba
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  EmPHasis-10 score for the assessment of quality of life in various types of pulmonary hypertension and its relation to outcome.

Authors:  Carla Favoccia; Aleksander Kempny; Janelle Yorke; Iain Armstrong; Laura C Price; Colm McCabe; Carl Harries; Stephen J Wort; Konstantinos Dimopoulos
Journal:  Eur J Prev Cardiol       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 7.804

Review 4.  Identifying meaningful intra-individual change standards for health-related quality of life measures.

Authors:  K W Wyrwich; F D Wolinsky
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.431

5.  Selexipag for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.

Authors:  Olivier Sitbon; Richard Channick; Kelly M Chin; Aline Frey; Sean Gaine; Nazzareno Galiè; Hossein-Ardeschir Ghofrani; Marius M Hoeper; Irene M Lang; Ralph Preiss; Lewis J Rubin; Lilla Di Scala; Victor Tapson; Igor Adzerikho; Jinming Liu; Olga Moiseeva; Xiaofeng Zeng; Gérald Simonneau; Vallerie V McLaughlin
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?

Authors:  C A McHorney; A R Tarlov
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Symptom severity and its effect on health-related quality of life over time in patients with pulmonary hypertension: a multisite longitudinal cohort study.

Authors:  Janelle Yorke; Christi Deaton; Malcolm Campbell; Linda McGowen; Paul Sephton; David G Kiely; Iain Armstrong
Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res       Date:  2018-03-01

8.  Adaptation and validation of the quality of life assessment of the Cambridge pulmonary hypertension outcome review (CAMPHOR) for Brazil.

Authors:  Ricardo Amorim Corrêa; Monica Corso Pereira; Mariana Ferreira Bizzi; Rafael W R de Oliveira; Camila Farnese Rezende; Bruna Cristina Marabita Tavares de Oliveira; Alice Heaney; Stephen P McKenna; Antonio Ribeiro-Oliveira
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2020-06-05

9.  Development and validation of the living with pulmonary hypertension questionnaire in pulmonary arterial hypertension patients.

Authors:  Nicola Bonner; Linda Abetz; Juliette Meunier; Mirko Sikirica; Stephen C Mathai
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 3.186

10.  Adaptation and validation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) for the Netherlands.

Authors:  M Wapenaar; J Twiss; M Wagenaar; P Seijkens; L van den Toorn; J Stepanous; A Heaney; A van den Bosch; K A Boomars
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.380

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.