Skip to main content

Table 5 PROMs as prognosis indicator

From: Prognostic value of patient-reported outcome measures in adult heart-transplant patients: a systematic review

Author Statistical model PROMs Prognosis indicator
Delgado, 2015 Multivariate regression analyses EQ-5D Neuromuscular disease: coefficient value − 0.158 (− 0.240 to − 0.075, p < 0.001)
Urological disease: coefficient value − 0.183 (− 0.301 to − 0.066, p < 0.001)
KCCQ overall score Readmissions: coefficient value − 1.177 (− 2.243 to − 0.112, p = 0.031)
Graft vascular disease: coefficient value − 10.198 (− 18.219 to − 2.178, p = 0.013)
Farmer, 2013 Multivariate regression analyses Quality of Life Index Satisfaction
Social and economic satisfaction domain
Mortality at 5 to 10 years after HT: Hazard Ratio 0.05 (0.00–0.75), p = 0.03
Harper, 1998 Multivariate regression analyses Millon Behavioral Health Inventory Prediction of survival:
MBHI scale between 17 of the 20, indicating high stress and difficulties coping, was a predictor of survival, p = 0.002*
Prediction of Post-transplant care required**
Pain Threat Responsivity, coefficient value 0.44*, p =  < 0.001
Cooperative coping style, coefficient value 0.21*, p = 0.037
Post-transplant Infection Rate
Future Despair, coefficient value 0.65*, p = 0.001
Life Threat Reactivity, coefficient value − 0.44*, p = 0.02
O’Brien, 1987 Multivariate regression analyses Nottingham Health Profile Percentage of all NHP pre-transplant score affirmed Relative mortality risk
0 1.00
20 2.07
40 4.29
60 8.89
80 18.41
100 38.11
White-Williams, 2013 Multivariate regression analyses   None of the PROM’ domains showed statistically significant prognostic value for survival or other outcomes  
  1. * Confidence intervals not informed
  2. ** Post-transplant care was evaluated by a care rate index defined as the hospitalization plus outpatient visit days over the number of days of survival