Cited by 1,827Heart Failure Treatment and ManagementHealth Education and ValidationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Development and evaluation of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire: a new health status measure for heart failure

Open access
Green, C.Patrick, Porter, Charles B., Bresnahan, Dennis R., Spertus, John A.·2000·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

Objectives To create a valid, sensitive, disease-specific health status measure for patients with congestive heart failure (CHF).Background Quantifying health status is becoming increasingly important for CHF. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is a new, self-administered, 23-item questionnaire that quantifies physical limitations, symptoms, self-efficacy, social interference and quality of life.Methods To establish the performance characteristics of the KCCQ, two distinct patient cohorts were recruited: 70 stable and 59 decompensated CHF patients with ejection fractions of <40. Upon entry into the study, patients were administered the KCCQ, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire and the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Questionnaires were repeated three months later.Results Convergent validity of each KCCQ domain was documented by comparison with available criterion standards (r = 0.46 to 0.74; p < 0.001 for all). Among those with stable CHF who remained stable by predefined criteria (n = 39), minimal changes in KCCQ domains were detected over three months of observation (mean change = 0.8 to 4.0 points, p = NS for all). In contrast, large changes in score were observed among patients whose decompensated CHF improved three months later (n = 39; mean change = 15.4 to 40.4 points, p < 0.01 for all). The sensitivity of the KCCQwas substantially greater than that of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure and the SF-36 questionnaires.Conclusions The KCCQis a valid, reliable and responsive health status measure for patients with CHF and may serve as a clinically meaningful outcome in cardiovascular research, patient management and quality assessment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00531-3

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Spertus J, Green C, Conway K, Uzun V. Creating a new disease- specific health status measure for congestive heart failure: a prototype for instrument development in the current era. Quality of Life Newsletter 1998;20:9 -10.
  2. Deyo R, Dieher P, Patrick D. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Controlled Clinical Trials 1991;12:142S-58S.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Green, C. P., Porter, C. B., Bresnahan, D. R., & Spertus, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
  • Saint Luke's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Spertus, John A.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-04
Volume
35
Issue
5
Pages
1245-1255
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2044591445
Cited by
1,827
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 111 · 2025: 135 · 2024: 126 · 2023: 138 · 2022: 126 · 2021: 142 · 2020: 124 · 2019: 105 · 2018: 89 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 79 · 2015: 82 · 2014: 61 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 65
FWCI
6.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, congestive heart failure, health status measurement, quality of life, acute decompensated heart failure, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, SF-36, convergent validity, responsiveness, physical limitations, clinical symptoms, self-efficacy, social interference
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adaptation, Psychological, Aged, Female, Health Status, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sensitivity and Specificity, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Geriatric Assessment, Single-Blind Method, Disease Progression, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review