CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Preferences of Heart Failure Patients in Daily Clinical Practice: Quality of Life or Longevity?

Kraai, Imke H., Vermeulen, Karin M., Luttik, Marie Louise A., Hoekstra, Tialda, Jaarsma, Tiny, Hillege, Hans L.·2013·European Journal of Heart Failure
DOI 10.1093/eurjhf/hft071
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

AIMS: Knowledge of patient preferences is vital for delivering optimal healthcare. This study uses utility measurement to assess the preferences of heart failure (HF) patients regarding quality of life or longevity. The utility approach represents the perspective of a patient; facilitates the combination of mortality, morbidity, and treatment regimen into a single score; and makes it possible to compare the effects of different interventions in healthcare. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient preferences of 100 patients with HF were assessed in interviews using the time trade-off (TTO) approach. Health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) was assessed with the EQ-5D and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ). Patients' own estimation of life expectancy was assessed with a visual analogue scale (VAS). Of the 100 patients (mean age 70 ± 9 years; 71% male), 61% attach more weight to quality of life over longevity; while 9% and 14% were willing to trade 6 and 12 months, respectively, for perfect health and attach more weight to quality of life. Patients willing to trade time had a significantly higher level of NT-proBNP and reported significantly more dyspnoea during exertion. Predictors of willingness to trade time were higher NT-proBNP and lower EQ VAS. CONCLUSION: The majority of HF patients attach more weight to quality of life over longevity. There was no difference between both groups with respect to life expectancy described by the patients. These insights enable open and personalized discussions of patients' preferences in treatment and care decisions, and could guide the future development of more patient-centred care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurjhf/hft071

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kraai, I. H., Vermeulen, K. M., Luttik, M. L. A., Hoekstra, T., Jaarsma, T., & Hillege, H. L.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Linköping University (SE)
Corresponding author
Kraai, Imke H.
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Heart Failure
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2013-10-01
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
1113-1121
ISSN
  • 1388-9842 (ISSN-L)
  • 1879-0844
DOI
10.1093/eurjhf/hft071
OpenAlex
W2014113395
Cited by
147
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2
FWCI
17.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
academic.oup.com/pages/standard-publication-reuse-rights (vor)
Locations
  • European Journal of Heart Failure (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
heart failure, patient preferences, quality of life, longevity, time trade-off, health-related quality of life, life expectancy, NT-proBNP, dyspnea, patient-centered care, utility measurement
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude to Death, Attitude to Health, Depression, Dyspnea, Fatigue, Female, Health Status, Heart Failure, Humans, Longevity, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Severity of Illness Index, Social Support, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Patient Preference

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