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