What is the methodological and reporting quality of health related quality of life in chronic heart failure clinical trials?

Differences in Health-Related Quality of Life among Patients with Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is characterized by a progressive clinical course marked by frequent exacerbations and repeated hospitalizations, leading to considerably high morbidity and mortality rates. Patients with HF present with a constellation of bothersome symptoms, which range from physical to psychological and mental manifestations. With the transition to more advanced HF stages, symptoms become increasingly more debilitating, interfere with activities of daily living and disrupt multiple domains of life, including physical functioning, psychological status, emotional state, cognitive function, intimate relationships, lifestyle status, usual role activities, social contact and support. By inflicting profuse limitations in numerous aspects of life, HF exerts a profoundly negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). It is therefore not surprising that patients with HF display lower levels of HRQOL compared not only to the general healthy population but also to patients suffering from other chronic diseases. On top of this, poor HRQOL in patients with HF becomes an even greater concern considering that it has been associated with unfavorable long-term outcomes and poor prognosis. Nevertheless, HRQOL may differ significantly among patients with HF. Indeed, it has consistently been reported that women with HF display poorer HRQOL compared to men, while younger patients with HF tend to exhibit lower levels of HRQOL than their older counterparts. Moreover, patients presenting with higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class (III-IV) have significantly more impaired HRQOL than those in a better NYHA class (I-II). Furthermore, most studies report worse levels of HRQOL in patients suffering from HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) compared to patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Last, but not least, differences in HRQOL have been noted depending on geographic location, with lower HRQOL levels having been recorded in Africa and Eastern Europe and higher in Western Europe in a recent large global study. Based on the observed disparities that have been invariably reported in the literature, this review article aims to provide insight into the underlying differences in HRQOL among patients with HF. Through an overview of currently existing evidence, fundamental differences in HRQOL among patients with HF are analyzed based on sex, age, NYHA functional class, ejection fraction and geographic location or ethnicity.

Long term changes in health-related quality of life for people with heart failure: the ECHOES study

AIMS

Heart failure (HF) impairs all aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but little is known about the effect of developing HF on HRQoL over time. We aimed to report changes in HRQoL over a 13-year period.

METHODS AND RESULTS

HRQoL was measured in the Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening (ECHOES) study and the ECHOES-X follow-up study (N = 1618) using the SF-36 questionnaire (Version 1). Mixed modelling compared changes in HRQoL across diagnostic groups, adjusting for potential predictors and design variables. Patients who had developed HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) at rescreening had significantly greater reduction in physical functioning (PF) and role physical (RP) scores compared with those without HF; adjusted mean difference in PF: HFrEF -16.1, [95% confidence interval (CI) -22.2 to -10.1]; HFpEF -14.6, (95% CI -21.2 to -8.1); in RP: HFrEF -20.7, (95% CI -31.8 to -9.7); HFpEF -19.3, (95% CI -31.0 to -7.6). Changes in HRQoL of those with a HF diagnosis at baseline and rescreen, with exception of role emotion, were similar to those without HF but started from a much lower baseline score.

CONCLUSIONS

People with a new diagnosis of HF at rescreening had a significant reduction in HRQoL. Conversely, for those with HF detected on initial screening, little change was observed in HRQoL scores on rescreening. Further research is required to understand the development of HF over time and to test interventions designed to prevent decline in HRQoL, potentially through earlier diagnosis and treatment optimization.

Pharmacotherapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and health-related quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to synthesize the evidence on the effect of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in June 2020. Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating contemporary HFrEF pharmacotherapy and reporting HRQoL as an outcome were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was HRQoL at last available follow-up analysed using a random-effects model. We included 37 studies from 5770 identified articles. Risk of bias was low in 10 trials and high/unclear in 27 trials. High certainty evidence from meta-analyses demonstrated improved HRQoL over placebo with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.23] and intravenous iron (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04-1.00). Furthermore, high certainty evidence from ≥1 landmark trial further supported improved HRQoL with angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17), ivabradine (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.23), hydralazine-nitrate (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.04-0.44) vs. placebo, and for angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (SMD 0.09, 95% CI 0.02-0.17). Findings were inconclusive for ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, digoxin, and oral iron based on low-to-moderate certainty evidence.

CONCLUSION

ARBs, ARNIs, SGLT2 inhibitors, ivabradine, hydralazine-nitrate, and intravenous iron improved HRQoL in patients with HFrEF. These findings can be incorporated into discussions with patients to enable shared decision-making.

Reporting of patient-centred outcomes in heart failure trials: are patient preferences being ignored?

Older people often suffer from multiple diseases. Therefore, universal cross-disease outcomes (e.g. functional status, quality of life, overall survival) are more relevant than disease-specific outcomes, and a range of potential outcomes are needed for medical decision-making. To assess how patient-relevant outcomes have penetrated randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reporting of these outcomes was reviewed in heart failure trials that included patients with multimorbidity. We systematically reviewed RCTs (Jan 2011–June 2012) and evaluated reported outcomes. Heart failure was chosen as condition of interest as this is common among older patients with multimorbidity. The main outcome was the proportion of RCTs reporting all-cause mortality, all-cause hospital admission, and outcomes in four domains of health, i.e. functional, signs and symptoms, psychological, and social domains. Of the 106 included RCTs, 50 (47 %) reported all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality and 29 (27 %) reported all-cause hospitalization and cardiovascular hospitalization. Of all trials, 68 (64 %) measured outcomes in the functional domain, 80 (75 %) in the domain of signs and symptoms, 65 (61 %) in the psychological domain, and 59 (56 %) in the social domain. Disease-specific instruments were more often used than non-disease-specific instruments. This review shows increasing attention for more patient-relevant outcomes; this is promising and indicates more awareness of the importance of a variety of outcomes desirable for patients. However, patients’ individual goal attainments were universally absent. For continued progress in patient-centred care, efforts are needed to develop these outcomes, study their merits and pitfalls, and intensify their use in research.

Drug therapy for heart failure in older patients-what do they want?

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is predominantly seen in older patients, and therefore real life medicine often requires the extrapolation of findings from trials conducted in much younger populations. Prescribing patterns and potential benefits in the elderly are heavily influenced by polypharmacy and co-morbid pathologies. Increasing longevity may become less relevant in the frail elderly, whereas improving quality of life (QoL) often becomes priority; the onus being on improving wellbeing, maintaining independence for longer, and delaying institutionalisation. Specific studies evaluating elderly patients with CHF are lacking and little is known regarding the tolerability and side-effect profile of evidence based drug therapies in this population. There has been recent interest on the impact of heart rate in patients with symptomatic CHF. Ivabradine, with selective heart rate lowering capabilities, is of benefit in patients with CHF and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in sinus rhythm, resulting in reduction of heart failure hospitalisation and cardiovascular death. This manuscript will focus on CHF and the older patient and will discuss the impact of heart rate, drug therapies and tolerability. It will also highlight the unmet need for specific studies that focus on patient-centred study end points rather than mortality targets that characterise most therapeutic trials. An on-going study evaluating the impact of ivabradine on QoL that presents a unique opportunity to evaluate the tolerability and impact of an established therapy on a wide range of real life, older patients with CHF will be discussed.

Are all outcomes in chronic heart failure rated equally? An argument for a patient-centred approach to outcome assessment

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a multi-dimensional and complex syndrome. Outcome measures are important for determining both the efficacy and quality of care and capturing the patient's perspective in evaluating the outcomes of health care delivery. Capturing the patient's perspective via patient-reported outcomes is increasingly important; however, including objective measures such as mortality would provide more complete account of outcomes important to patients. Currently, no single measure for CHF outcomes captures all dimensions of the quality of care from the patient's perspective. To describe the role of outcome measures in CHF from the perspective of patients, a structured literature review was undertaken. This review discusses the concepts and methodological issues related to measurement of CHF outcomes. Outcome assessment at the level of the patient, provider and health care system were identified as being important. The perspectives of all stakeholders should be considered when developing an outcomes measurement suite to inform CHF health care. This paper recommends that choice of outcome measures should depend on their ability to provide a comprehensive, comparable, meaningful and accurate assessment that are important to patient.