nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

01.03.2009 | Brief Communication

Health-related quality of life after coronary artery bypass grafting. The impact of a randomised controlled home-based intervention program

verfasst von: Irene Lie, Harald Arnesen, Leiv Sandvik, Glenys Hamilton, Eli H. Bunch

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 2/2009

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a home based intervention program (HBIP) on health related quality of life (HRQoL) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). To strengthen the clinical interpretation, HRQoL data were compared to the general population.

Methods

In a randomised controlled trial (RCT), a total of 185 CABG patients (93 vs 92) completed the study. The intervention group received a HBIP 2 and 4 weeks after surgery. HRQoL was measured by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) in both patient groups before surgery, at 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery.

Results

Significant improvements were found in both groups for the majority of subscales of HRQoL at 6-week and 6-month follow-up. However, these improvements did not differ significantly between the groups. Compared to the general population, significant differences (P < 0.05) were found for the SF-36 subscales: role physical, role emotional and bodily pain.

Conclusions

HRQoL after CABG improved markedly over time, but no significant or clinically important differences were found when compared with controls. Thus, work to further develop and test the effect of a HBIP on HRQoL in patients undergoing rehabilitation following CABG is warranted.

Norwegian Association of Cardiothoracic Surgeons. (2006). Heart surgery in Norway 2006. Register of heart surgery. http://www.legeforeningen.no/asset/37733/1/37733_1.ppt#261,1,. Heart surgery in Norway 2006 Norwegian Association of Cardiothoracic Surgeons. Accessed 1 Apr 2008.

World Health Organisation. (1993). Needs and action priorities in cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in patients with CHD. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

Kavanagh, T. (2000). Exercise in cardiac rehabilitation. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 34(1), 3. doi:10.1136/bjsm.34.1.3.CrossRefPubMed

Ades, P. A. (2001). Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 345(12), 892–902. doi:10.1056/NEJMra001529.CrossRefPubMed

Tranmer, J. E., & Parry, M. J. (2004). Enhancing postoperative recovery of cardiac surgery patients: A randomized clinical trial of an advanced practice nursing intervention. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 26(5), 515–532. doi:10.1177/0193945904265690.CrossRefPubMed

Barnason, S., Zimmerman, L., Nieveen, J., Schmaderer, M., Carranza, B., & Reilly, S. (2003). Impact of a home communication intervention for coronary artery bypass graft patients with ischemic heart failure on self-efficacy, coronary disease risk factor modification, and functioning. Heart and Lung, 32(3), 147–158. doi:10.1016/S0147-9563(03)00036-0.CrossRefPubMed

Barnason, S., Zimmerman, L., Nieveen, J., & Hertzog, M. (2006). Impact of a telehealth intervention to augment home health care on functional and recovery outcomes of elderly patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. Heart and Lung, 35(4), 225–233. doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2005.10.003.CrossRefPubMed

Oldenburg, B., Martin, A., Greenwood, J., Bernstein, L., & Allan, R. (1995). A controlled trial of a behavioral and educational intervention following coronary artery bypass surgery. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation, 15(1), 39–46. doi:10.1097/00008483-199501000-00006.CrossRefPubMed

Hevey, D., Brown, A., Cahill, A., Newton, H., Kierns, M., & Horgan, J. H. (2003). Four-week multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation produces similar improvements in exercise capacity and quality of life to a 10-week program. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation, 23(1), 17–21. doi:10.1097/00008483-200301000-00004.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Arthur, H. M., Smith, K. M., Kodis, J., & McKelvie, R. (2002). A controlled trial of hospital versus home-based exercise in cardiac patients. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 34(10), 1544–1550. doi:10.1097/00005768-200210000-00003.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Jolly, K., Taylor, R., Lip, G. Y., Greenfield, S., Raftery, J., Mant, J., et al. (2007). The Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation Study (BRUM). Home-based compared with hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation in a multi-ethnic population: Cost-effectiveness and patient adherence. Health Technology Assessment, 11(35), 1–118.PubMed

12.

McGillion, M., Watt-Watson, J., Kim, J., & Yamada, J. (2004). A systematic review of psychoeducational intervention trials for the management of chronic stable angina. Journal of Nursing Management, 12(3), 174–182.PubMed

13.

Lie, I., Arnesen, H., Sandvik, L., Hamilton, G., & Bunch, E. H. (2007). Effects of a home-based intervention program on anxiety and depression 6 months after coronary artery bypass grafting: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 62(4), 411–418. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2006.11.010.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hays, R. D. (2005). Generic versus disease-targeted instruments. In R. D. Hays & P. M. Fayers (Eds.), Assessing quality of life in clinical trials (2nd ed., pp. 3–9). New York: Oxford University Press.

15.

Spertus, J. A., Winder, J. A., Dewhurst, T. A., Deyo, R. A., & Fihn, S. D. (1994). Monitoring the quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease. The American Journal of Cardiology, 74(12), 1240–1244. doi:10.1016/0002-9149(94)90555-X.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Ware, J. E., Jr, Kosinski, M., & Gandek, B. (2000). SF-36 Health Survey. Manual and interpretation guide (2nd ed.). Boston: New England Medical Center.

17.

Spertus, J. A., Winder, J. A., Dewhurst, T. A., Deyo, R. A., Prodzinski, J., McDonell, M., et al. (1995). Development and evaluation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire: A new functional status measure for coronary artery disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 25(2), 333–341. doi:10.1016/0735-1097(94)00397-9.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Ware, J. E., Jr, Kosinski, M., & Dewey, J. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey (standard and acute forms) (2nd ed.). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.

19.

Falcoz, P. E., Chocron, S., Mercier, M., Puyraveau, M., & Etievent, J. P. (2002). Comparison of the Nottingham health profile and the 36-item health survey questionnaires in cardiac surgery. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 73(4), 1222–1228. doi:10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03371-4.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lindsay, G. M., Hanlon, P., Smith, L. N., & Wheatley, D. J. (2000). Assessment of changes in general health status using the short-form 36 questionnaire 1 year following coronary artery bypass grafting. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 18(5), 557–564. doi:10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00542-X.CrossRefPubMed

21.

McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Jr, Lu, J. F., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care, 32(1), 40–66. doi:10.1097/00005650-199401000-00004.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Vaccarino, V., Lin, Z. Q., Kasl, S. V., Mattera, J. A., Roumanis, S. A., Abramson, J. L., et al. (2003). Sex differences in health status after coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation, 108(21), 2642–2647. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000097117.28614.D8.CrossRefPubMed

23.

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. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000087600.83707.FD.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Conaway, D. G., House, J., Bandt, K., Hayden, L., Borkon, A. M., & Spertus, J. A. (2003). The elderly: Health status benefits and recovery of function one year after coronary artery bypass surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 42(8), 1421–1426. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(03)01052-0.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Bjorner, J. B., Wallenstein, G. V., Martin, M. C., Lin, P., Blaisdell-Gross, B., Tak, P. C., et al. (2007). Interpreting score differences in the SF-36 Vitality scale: Using clinical conditions and functional outcomes to define the minimally important difference. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 23(4), 731–739. doi:10.1185/030079907X178757.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Loge, J. H., & Kaasa, S. (1998). Short form 36 (SF-36) health survey: Normative data from the general Norwegian population. Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine, 26(4), 250–258.PubMed

27.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural science (2nd ed.). England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

28.

Cella, D. (2000). Discussion of issues concerning the quality of life in cancer patients. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine, 14, 95–97. doi:10.2165/00124363-200004000-00007.CrossRef

29.

Vickers, A. J. (2001). The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: A simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 1, 6. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-1-6.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Vickers, A. J., & Altman, D. G. (2001). Statistics notes: Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed), 323(7321), 1123–1124. doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1123.CrossRef

31.

Hjermstad, M. J., Fayers, P. M., Bjordal, K., & Kaasa, S. (1998). Using reference data on quality of life—the importance of adjusting for age and gender, exemplified by the EORTC QLQ-C30 (+3). European Journal of Cancer, 34(9), 1381–1389. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(98)00136-1.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Borkon, A. M., Muehlebach, G. F., House, J., Marso, S. P., & Spertus, J. A. (2002). A comparison of the recovery of health status after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 74(5), 1526–1530. doi:10.1016/S0003-4975(02)04063-8.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Gjeilo, K. H., Wahba, A., Klepstad, P., Lydersen, S., & Stenseth, R. (2006). Health-related quality of life three years after coronary surgery: A comparison with the general population. Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal, 40(1), 29–36. doi:10.1080/14017430500339321.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Hawkes, A. L., Nowak, M., & Speare, R. (2003). Short Form-36 Health Survey as an evaluation tool for cardiac rehabilitation programs: Is it appropriate? Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation, 23(1), 22–25. doi:10.1097/00008483-200301000-00005.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Visser, M. R., Oort, F. J., & Sprangers, M. A. (2005). Methods to detect response shift in quality of life data: A convergent validity study. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 629–639. doi:10.1007/s11136-004-2577-x.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Smith, K. M., Arthur, H. M., McKelvie, R. S., & Kodis, J. (2004). Differences in sustainability of exercise and health-related quality of life outcomes following home or hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, 11(4), 313–319. doi:10.1097/01.hjr.0000136414.40017.10.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Favarato, M. E., Hueb, W., Boden, W. E., Lopes, N., Nogueira, C. R., Takiuti, M., et al. (2007). Quality of life in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary artery disease: A comparative post hoc analyses of medical, angioplasty or surgical strategies—MASS II trial. International Journal of Cardiology, 116(3), 364–370. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.06.001.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Health-related quality of life after coronary artery bypass grafting. The impact of a randomised controlled home-based intervention program
verfasst von: Irene Lie
Harald Arnesen
Leiv Sandvik
Glenys Hamilton
Eli H. Bunch
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2009
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 2/2009
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9438-y

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2009

Exploring household income as a predictor of psychological well-being among long-term colorectal cancer survivors

Mediators, moderators, and modulators of causal effects in clinical trials––Dynamically Modified Outcomes (DYNAMO) in health-related quality of life

The first stage of developing preference-based measures: constructing a health-state classification using Rasch analysis

Does age modify the relationship between morbidity severity and physical health in English and Dutch family practice populations?

Chemotherapeutic impact on pain and global health-related quality of life in hormone-refractory prostate cancer: Dynamically Modified Outcomes (DYNAMO) analysis of a randomized controlled trial

Validation of modified forms of the PedsQL generic core scales and cancer module scales for adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer or a blood disorder