Coronary Intervention Improves Disease Specific Health-Related Quality of Life but Not Individualised Quality of Life: A Potential Response Shift Effect?
To explore potential response shift effects with different quality of life (QoL) instruments in cardiac patients undergoing coronary intervention. Study Design and Setting: Recalibration was assessed with the disease specific health-related quality of life (HRQL) instrument MacNew in combination with a then-test approach. Reconceptualisation and reprioritisation were assessed with the individualised QoL instrument SEIQoL-DW. Significant treatment effects were seen on the MacNew (global Δ: 0.6 ± 1.1, p = 0.004) but not on the SEIQoL-DW (Δ: 3.3 ± 16, p = 0.37) 6 months after coronary intervention. No recalibration effect was found on the MacNew then-test, while with the SEIQOL-DW potential response shift effects of reconceptualisation and reprioritisation were seen. For the first time response shift effects were explored in cardiac patients undergoing coronary intervention. This study confirmed that there is a clinically significant improvement in disease specific HRQL over time following successful coronary interventions. However, no treatment effect was seen for individualised QoL with the SEIQoL-DW. This might be due to reconceptualisation and reprioritisation response effects. Future studies need to focus on exploring response shift effects, and the interrelationship between its different components, captured by different patient reported outcome instruments in larger patient groups undergoing coronary interventions.
KeywordsSchedule for the evaluation of individualised quality of life – Direct weighting (SEIQoL-DW) MacNew Heart disease Angina Coronary intervention Response shift Then-test
- Ahmed, S., Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Hanley, J. A., & Cohen, S. R. (2005a). The structural equation modeling technique did not show a response shift, contrary to the results of the then test and the individualized approaches. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(11), 1125–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Folland, E. D., Hartigan, P. M., & Parisi, A. F. (1997). Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for stable angina pectoris: outcomes for patients with double-vessel versus single-vessel coronary artery disease in a Veterans Affairs Cooperative randomized trial. Veterans Affairs ACME InvestigatorS. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 29(7), 1505–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Harris, D., O’Boyle, C. A., Marley, J., Höfer, S., & Heuston, F. (2010). A Comparison of Implant Supported Mandibular Dentures and Conventional Dentures on Quality of Life in Edentulous Patients: A Randomised, Prospective, within Subject Controlled Clinical Trial. in preparation.Google Scholar
- Hickey, A. M., Bury, G., O’Boyle, C. A., Bradley, F., O’Kelly, F. D., & Shannon, W. (1996). A new short form individual quality of life measure (SEIQoL-DW): application in a cohort of individuals with HIV/AIDS. BMJ, 313(7048), 29–33.Google Scholar
- Höfer, S., Benzer, W., Schüßler, G., von Steinbüchel, N., & Oldridge, N. B. (2003). Health-related quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease treated for angina: validity and reliability of German translations of two specific questionnaires. Quality of Life Research, 12(2), 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Höfer, S., Schmid, J. P., Frick, M., Benzer, W., Laimer, H., Oldridge, N., et al. (2008). Psychometric properties of the MacNew heart disease health-related quality of life instrument in patients with heart failure. J Eval Clin Pract.Google Scholar
- Robling, M. (2006). Measuring change in patient quality of life over time: An evaluation of scale responsiveness and patient response shift. Unpublished Monography. Cardiff: Cardiff University.Google Scholar
- Robling, M., & Hood, K. (2002). Response shift, responsiveness or recall bias? The British Journal of General Practice, 52(480), 585.Google Scholar
- Rustoen, T., Howie, J., Eidsmo, I., & Moum, T. (2005). Hope in patients hospitalized with heart failure. American Journal of Critical Care, 14(5), 417–425.Google Scholar
- Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. (2002). An introduction to quality of life assessment in oncology: the value of measuring patient-reported outcomes. The American Journal of Managed Care, 8(18 Suppl), S550–S559.Google Scholar
- Solomon, A. J., & Gersh, B. J. (1998). Management of chronic stable angina: medical therapy, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Lessons from the randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 128(3), 216–223.Google Scholar
- Strauss, W. E., Fortin, T., Hartigan, P., Folland, E. D., & Parisi, A. F. (1995). A comparison of quality of life scores in patients with angina pectoris after angioplasty compared with after medical therapy. Outcomes of a randomized clinical trial. Veterans Affairs Study of Angioplasty Compared to Medical Therapy Investigators. Circulation, 92(7), 1710–1719.Google Scholar
- Zhang, Z., Mahoney, E. M., Stables, R. H., Booth, J., Nugara, F., Spertus, J. A., et al. (2003). Disease-specific health status after stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery: one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial. Circulation, 108(14), 1694–1700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar