Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality-of-Life Instruments in Hypertension

  • Review Article
  • Quality-of-Life Instruments in Hypertension
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Summary

Thi s review considers the choice of dimensions to be assessed and the practica l problems of measuring qualit y of life in hypertensive paticnts. The dimensions of symptomatic well-being. psychological well-being, slcep. sexual fun ction and cognitive function shou ld be assessed. Symptomatic wel l-being may be measured by many different instruments. and thai devised by the authors has been used extensively. The results in diffe rent trials may therefore be exami ned for consistency and sensitivity. Psychological well-being has been assessed by the Psychological General Well-Being Index. the Symptom Rating Test and the Profi le of Mood States. The response of these instruments is discussed. The assessment of sleep. sexual function and cogniti ve function is also described. It is recommended that quality-of-life instruments to bee mployed in trials of antihypertensive drugs are known to be sensitive to the effects of such drugs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sueiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publication, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cox DR, Filzpatrick R, Fletcher AE, et al. Quality of life asssesment: can we keep it simple. J R Statist Soc 1992; 155: 353–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hunt SM, McEwen J, McKenna SP. Measuring health status. London: Croom Helm, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bergner M, Bobbit RA, Carter WB, et al. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measurement. Med Care 1981; 19: 787–805

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Measuring functioning and well being: the medical outcomes study approach. In: Stewart AL, Ware JE, editors. Durham: Duke University Press, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nicardipine as antihypertensive monotherapy: positive effects on quality of life. J Hum Hypertens 1991; 5: 205–13

  7. Kellner R, Sheffidd BF. A self-rating scale of distress. Psychol Med 1973; 3: 88–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fletcher AE, Hunt BM, Bulpitt CJ. Evaluation of quality of life in clinical trial in cardiovaseular disease. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 557–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fanshcl S, Bush JW. A health status index and its application to health services outcOmes. Operations Res 1970; 18: 1021–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fletcher A. Pressure to treat and pressure to cost: a review of cost effectiveness analysis [editorial]. J Hypertens 1991; 9: 193–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fletcher AE, Bulpitt CJ. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of risk factors for cardiovascular disease: an epidemiological perspective. PharmacoEconomics 1992; 1: 33–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bulpitt CJ. Quality of life in hypetensive patients. In: Amery A, Fagard R, Lijnen P, et al., editors. Hypertensive cardiovascular disease: pathophysiology and treatment. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 1982: 929–48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosser RM. A health index and output measure. In: Walker SR, Rosser RM, editors. Quality of life assessment: key issues in the 1990s. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993: 151–78

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing thc usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 171–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bar-On D, Amir M. Reexamining the quality of life of hypertensive patients: a new self-structured measure. Am J Hypertens 1993; 6: 625–65

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bulpitt CJ, Fletcher AE. The measurement of quality of life in hypertensive patients: a practical approach. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 30: 353–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fletcher AE, Bulpitt CJ, Hawkins CM, et al. Quality of life on antihypertensive therapy: a randomised double-blind controlled trial of captopril and atenolol. J Hypertens 1990; 8: 463–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fletcher AE, Bulpitt CJ, Chase DM, et al. Quality of life with three antihypertensive treatment, - cilazapril, atenolol, nifedipine. Hypertension 1992; 19: 499–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fletcher AE, Hawkins CM, Chester PC, et al. Thc effects of verapamil and propranolol on qualily of life in hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 1989; 3: 125–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Fletcher AE, Battersby C, Adnitt P, et al. Quality or life of antihypetensive therapy: a double blind trial comparing quality of life on pinacidil and nifedipine in combination with a thiazide diuretic. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 20: 108–14

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Os I, Bratland B, Dahlof B, et al. Lisinopril or nifedipine in essential hypertention? A Norwegian mUlticenter study on effiency, tolerability and qualily of life in 828 patients. J Hypertens 1991; 9: 1097–104

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Onwik P, Thaulow E, Herland OB, et al. Double blind, parallel, comparative study on quality of life during treatment with amlodipine or cnalapril in mild or moderate hypertensive patients: a multicentre study. J Hypertens 1993; 11: 103–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Coope J, Warrendcr TS. Randomised trial of treatment of hypertention in elderly patients in primary care. BMJ 1986; 293: 1145–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Croog SH, Levine S, Testa M, et al. The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 1657–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wassertheil-Smoler S, Blaufox MD, Oberman A, et al. for the TAIM Research Group. Effect of antihypertensives on sexual function and qualily of life: the TAIM Study. Ann Intern Med 1991; 114: 613–20

    Google Scholar 

  26. Dahlöf C, Dimenäs E, Olofsson B. Documentation of an instrument for assessment of subjective CNS-related symptoms during cardiovascular pharmacoherapy. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1989; 3: 919–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dahlof C, Hedner T, Thulin T, et al. for the Swedish Diltiazem Metoprolol Multi-Centre Study Group. Effects of diltiazem and metoprolol on blood pressure, adverse symptoms and general well-being. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1991; 40: 453–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Programme (SHEP) Cooperative Research Group. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. JAMA 1991; 265: 3255–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Applegate WH, Phillips HL, Schnaper H, et al. A randomised controlled trial of the effects of three antihypertensive agents on blood pressure control and quality of life in older women. Arch Intern Med 1991; 151: 1817–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. McNair DM, LofT M, Doppleman LF. Manual for the profile of mood states. San Diego: San Diego Educational and Industrial Testing Service, 1971

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dupuy HJ. The Psychological General Well-being (PGWB) Index. In: Wenger NK, Mattson ME, Furberg CD, et al., editors. Assessment of quality of life in clinical trials of cardiovascular therapy. New York: Le Jacq, 1984: 170–83

    Google Scholar 

  32. Goldberg DP. The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. Maudsley monograph no. 22. Oxford: Odord University Press, 1972

    Google Scholar 

  33. Palmer AJ, Fletcher AE, Rudge PJ, et al. Quality of life in hypertensives treated with atenolol or captopril: J double blind cross over trial. J Hypertension 1992; 10: 1409–16

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Mecnan RF. Effect sizes for intapreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989; 27 Suppl.3: S178–89

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Ware Jr JE, Johnston SA, Davies-Avery A, et al. Conceptualization and measurement of health for adults in Ihe health insurance study. Mental health, Santa Monica, California: Rand Corp., 1979: 111

    Google Scholar 

  36. Steiner SS, Friedhoff AJ, Wilson BL, et al. Antihypertensive treatment and quality of life: a comparison of atenolol, captopril, enalapril and propranolol. J Hum Hypertens 1990; 4: 217–25

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Testa MA, Anderson RB, Nadky JF, et al. Quality of life and antihypertensive therapy in men. N Engl J Med 1993; 328: 907–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Palmer A, Flecher A, Hamilton G, et al. A comparison of verapamil and nifedipine on quality of life. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 30: 365–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Fletcher A, Beevers G, Wilkinson R, et al. The effect of two centrally acting drugs on the quality of life. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1991; 41: 397–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Bulpitt O, Hofffbrand BI, Dollery CT. Contribution of drug treatment to symtoms of hypertensive patients. In: Gross F, Strasser T, editors. Mild hypertention: natural history and management. Bath: Pitman Medical, 1979; 291–302

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bulpitt CJ, Dollery CT, Carne S. A symptom questionnaire for hypertcnsive patients. J Chorn Dis 1974; 27: 309–23

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Report of Medical Research Council Working Party on mild to moderate hypertension. Adverse reactions to bendronuazide and propranolol for the treatment of mild hypertension. Lancet 1981; 2: 539–42

    Google Scholar 

  43. Curb JD, Borhani NO, Blaszkowski TP, et al. Long-term surveillance for adverse effects of antihypertensive drugs. JAMA 1985; 253: 3263–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Stamler J, Prineas RJ, Neaton JD, et al. Background and design of the new US trial on diet and drug treatment of ‘mild’ hypertension (TOMHS). Am J Cardiol 1987; 59: 51G–6OG

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Grimm R. Treating mild hypertension. Report from Hypertension Update II Scotland, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  46. Croog SH, Levine S, Sudilovsky A, et al. Sexual symptoms in hypertensive patients: a clinical trial of antihypertensive medications. Arch Intern Med 1988; 148: 788–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Bulpitt CJ, Beevers DG, Butler A, et al. The effects of antihypertensive drugs On sexual function in men and women: a report from the DHSS Hypertension Care Computing Project. J Hum Hypertens 1989; 3: 53–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Battersby C, Hartley K, Fletcher AE, et al. Cognitive function in hypertension: a community based study. J Hum Hypertens 1993; 7: 117–23

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Talland GA, Schwab RS. Performance with multiple sets in Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsycologia 1964; 2: 45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Weschsler D. The measurment and appraisal of adult intelligence scale. New York: Psycological Corp., 1955

    Google Scholar 

  51. Reitan RM, Wolfson O. The Halstead-Reilan neuropsychologycal test battery: theory and clinical interpretation. Neuropsychology Press, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rey A. Lexamen clinique en psychologic. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1964

    Google Scholar 

  53. Solomon S, Hotchkiss E, Saravay SM, et al. Impairment of memory function by antihypertensive medicatiOn. Arch Geo Psychiatry 1983; 40: 1109–12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Lichter I, Ricbardson PJ, Wykc MA. Differential effects of atenolol and enalapril on memory during treatment for essential hypenension. Bt J Clin Pharmacol 1986; 21: 641–5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Herrick AL, Waller PC, Berkin KE, et al. Comparison of cnalapril and utenolol in mild to moderate hypertension. Am J Med 1989; 86: 421–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Bulpill CJ, Fletcher AE. Cognitive function and and anarapil converting enzyme inhibitors in comparison with other antihypertensive drugs. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1992; 19: S100–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Broadbent DE, Cooper PF, Fitzgerald P, et al. The cognitive failures questioonaire (CFQ) and its correlates. Br J Clin Psychol 1982; 21: 1–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Slovick DI, Fletcher AE, Daymood M, et al. Quality of life and cognitive function on a diuretic compared with a beta-blocker: a randomised controlled trial of bendrofluazide versus dilevalol in elderly hypertensive patients. Cardiol Elderly. In press

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Geriatric Medicine, Royal Postgraduate Medical School, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London, W120NN, England

    Christopher J. Bulpitt

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Population Sciences, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, England

    Astrid E. Fletcher

Authors
  1. Christopher J. Bulpitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Astrid E. Fletcher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bulpitt, C.J., Fletcher, A.E. Quality-of-Life Instruments in Hypertension. Pharmacoeconomics 6, 523–535 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199406060-00006

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199406060-00006

Keywords

Search

Navigation