nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

02.01.2019

Measuring subjective wellbeing in patients with heart disease: relationship and comparison between health-related quality of life instruments

verfasst von: Lan Gao, Marj Moodie, Gang Chen

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 4/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purposes

This study aimed to validate the use of subjective wellbeing (SWB) in patients with heart disease, to explore the complementary vs substitute relationship between SWB and health status utility (HSU), and to reveal which life domains matter for patients with heart disease compared to healthy persons.

Methods

Data were obtained from a large multi-national, multi-instrument comparison survey. Subjective wellbeing instruments (ONS4, PWI, SWLS), health status utility instruments (15D, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D-5L, HUI3 and SF-6D) and a disease-specific quality of life instrument (MacNew) were administered among patients with heart disease (N = 943). Validity and sensitivity of SWBs were studied. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to examine the difference in descriptive systems between the SWB, HSU and MacNew. The importance of life domain satisfaction in explaining overall life satisfaction was investigated using regression analysis.

Results

The known-group analysis showed that both SWB and HSU scores differed according to changes in the severity of heart disease. EFA showed that SWB and HSU were generally complementary instruments. The life domains that were significantly important to patients with heart disease were standard of living, followed by achieving in life, personal relationships, personal health, and future security. Compared to the healthy public, personal health and future security were significantly more important life domains.

Conclusions

Assessing SWB provides complementary information on understanding heart patients’ subjective outcome over the use of quality of life instruments alone. Given the adverse psychological impact of heart disease, addressing the important domain revealed by SWB assessment in management planning should be considered.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Lopez, A. D., & Murray, C. C. (1998). The global burden of disease, 1990–2020. Nature Medicine, 4(11), 1241–1243.CrossRefPubMed

Koch, M. B., Davidsen, M., Andersen, L. V., Juel, K., & Jensen, G. B. (2015). Increasing prevalence despite decreasing incidence of ischaemic heart disease and myocardial infarction. A national register based perspective in Denmark, 1980–2009. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 22(2), 189–195.CrossRefPubMed

Rosamond, W., Flegal, K., Furie, K., Go, A., Greenlund, K., Haase, N., et al. (2008). Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2008 update—A report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation, 117(4), E25–E146.PubMed

Lloyd-Jones, D., Adams, R. J., Brown, T. M., Carnethon, M., Dai, S., De Simone, G., et al. (2010). Executive summary: Heart disease and stroke statistics-2010 update—A report from the American Heart association. Circulation, 121(7), 948–954.CrossRefPubMed

Nichols, M., Townsend, N., Scarborough, P., & Rayner, M. (2014). Cardiovascular disease in Europe 2014: Epidemiological update. European Heart Journal, 35(42), 2950–2959.CrossRefPubMed

Mommersteeg, P. M. C., Denollet, J., Spertus, J. A., & Pedersen, S. S. (2009). Health status as a risk factor in cardiovascular disease: A systematic review of current evidence. American Heart Journal, 157(2), 208–218.CrossRefPubMed

Rumsfeld, J. S., MaWhinney, S., McCarthy, M., Shroyer, A. L. W., VillaNueva, C. B., O’Brien, M., et al. (1999). Health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. JAMA-Journal of the American Medical Association, 281(14), 1298–1303.CrossRef

Spertus, J. A., Jones, P., McDonell, M., Fan, V., & Fihn, S. D. (2002). Health status predicts long-term outcome in outpatients with coronary disease. Circulation, 106(1), 43–49.CrossRefPubMed

Quality-of-Life and Clinical-Trials. (1995). Lancet, 346(8966), 1–2.

10.

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRef

11.

Tessier, P., Lelorain, S., & Bonnaud-Antignac, A. (2012). A comparison of the clinical determinants of health-related quality of life and subjective well-being in long-term breast cancer survivors. European Journal of Cancer Care, 21(5), 692–700.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Steptoe, A., Deaton, A., & Stone, A. A. (2015). Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing. Lancet, 385(9968), 640–648.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Goodwin, G. M. (2006). Depression and associated physical diseases and symptoms. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 8(2), 259–265.PubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Tanno, K., Sakata, K., Ohsawa, M., Onoda, T., Itai, K., Yaegashi, Y., Tamakoshi, A., & Grp, J. S. (2009). Associations of ikigai as a positive psychological factor with all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality among middle-aged and elderly Japanese people: Findings from the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 67(1), 67–75.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Tindle, H. A., Chang, Y. F., Kuller, L. H., Manson, J. E., Robinson, J. G., Rosal, M. C., Siegle, G. J., & Matthews, K. A. (2009). Optimism, cynical hostility, and incident coronary heart disease and mortality in the Women’s Health Initiative. Circulation, 120(8), 656–662.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FDA (2009). Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Last Accessed 4, June, 2018.

18.

European Medicines Agency. (2005). Committee for medicinal products for human use. Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products. Available from: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ewp/13939104en.pdf. Last Accessed 4, June, 2018.

19.

Dolan, P., Layard, R., & Metcalfe, R. (2011). Measuring Subjective wellbeing for public policy: Recommendations on measures. CEP Special Papers 23, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

20.

Cubí-Mollá, P., de Vries, J., & Devlin, N. (2014). A study of the relationship between health and subjective well-being in Parkinson’s disease patients. Value in Health, 17(4), 372–379.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., Khan, M. A., Chen, G., & Maxwell, A. (2016). Measuring the sensitivity and construct validity of 6 utility instruments in 7 disease areas. Med Decis Making, 36(2), 147–159.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Personal Well-being user guidance. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/methodologies/personalwellbeingsurveyuserguide. Last accessed 24 August 2018.

23.

International Wellbeing Group. (2013). Personal Wellbeing Index: 5th Edition. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University.

24.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Vautier, S., Mullet, E., & Jmel, S. (2004). Assessing the structural robustness of self-rated satisfaction with life: A sem analysis. Social Indicators Research, 68(2), 235–249.CrossRef

26.

Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale—Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 149–161.CrossRefPubMed

27.

De Smedt, D., Clays, E., & De Bacquer, D. (2016). Measuring health-related quality of life in cardiac patients. The European Heart Journal - Quality of Care & Clinical Outcomes, 2(3), 149–150.CrossRef

28.

Heiskanen, J., Tolppanen, A. M., Roine, R. P., Hartikainen, J., Hippelainen, M., Miettinen, H., & Martikainen, J. (2016). Comparison of EQ-5D and 15D instruments for assessing the health-related quality of life in cardiac surgery patients. The European Heart Journal - Quality of Care & Clinical Outcomes, 2(3), 193–200.CrossRef

29.

Richardson, J., Sinha, K., Lezzi, A., & Khan, M. (2011). Modelling the utility of health states with the assessment of quality of life (AQoL) 8D instrument: Overview and utility scoring algorithm. Available from: http://www.aqol.com.au/papers/researchpaper63.pdf. Last Accessed 4th June 2018.

30.

Richardson, J., Sinha, K., Iezzi, A., & Khan, M. A. (2014). Modelling utility weights for the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-8D. Quality of Life Research, 23(8), 2395–2404.CrossRefPubMed

31.

EuroQol. https://euroqol.org/eq-5d-instruments/eq-5d-5l-about/.

32.

Devlin, N. J., Shah, K. K., Feng, Y., Mulhern, B., & van Hout, B. (2018). Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Economics, 27(1), 7–22.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Health Utilities Inc. Leaders in health-related quality of life research. Available from: http://www.healthutilities.com. Last Accessed 4th June 2018.

34.

Horsman, J., Furlong, W., Feeny, D., & Torrance, G. (2003). The Health Utilities Index (HUI): Concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Feeny, D., Furlong, W., Torrance, G. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Zhu, Z. L., DePauw, S., Denton, M., & Boyle, M. (2002). Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40(2), 113–128.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21(2), 271–292.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Oldridge, N., Guyatt, G., Jones, N., Crowe, J., Singer, J., Feeny, D., Mckelvie, R., Runions, J., Streiner, D., & Torrance, G. (1991). Effects on quality-of-life with comprehensive rehabilitation after acute myocardial-infarction. American Journal of Cardiology, 67(13), 1084–1089.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Lim, L. L. Y., Valenti, L. A., Knapp, J. C., Dobson, A. J., Plotnikoff, R., Higginbotham, N., & Heller, R. F. (1993). A self-administered quality-of-life questionnaire after acute myocardial-infarction. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(11), 1249–1256.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Valenti, L., Lim, L., Heller, R. F., & Knapp, J. (1996). An improved questionnaire for assessing quality of life after acute myocardial infarction. Quality of Life Research, 5(1), 151–161.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Dixon, T., Lim, L. L. Y., & Oldridge, N. B. (2002). The MacNew heart disease health-related quality of life instrument: Reference data for users. Quality of Life Research, 11(2), 173–183.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Fayers, P., & Machin, D. (2007). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. New York: Wiley.CrossRef

42.

Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2003). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

43.

McAdams, K. K., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2012). The role of domain satisfaction in explaining the paradoxical association between life satisfaction and age. Social Indicators Research, 109(2), 295–303.CrossRef

44.

Basu, A., & Rathouz, P. J. (2005). Estimating marginal and incremental effects on health outcomes using flexible link and variance function models. Biostatistics, 6(1), 93–109.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Basu, A. (2005). Extended generalized linear models: Simultaneous estimation of flexible link and variance functions. The Stata Journal, 5(4), 501–516.CrossRef

46.

Gong, Y., Handberg, E. M., Gerhard, T., Cooper-Dehoff, R. M., Ried, L. D., Johnson, J. A., Pepine, C. J., & Investigators, I. (2009). Systolic blood pressure and subjective well-being in patients with coronary artery disease. Clinical Cardiology, 32(11), 627–632.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Richardson, J., Iezzi, A., & Khan, M. A. (2015). Why do multi-attribute utility instruments produce different utilities: The relative importance of the descriptive systems, scale and ‘micro-utility’ effects. Quality of Life Research, 24(8), 2045–2053.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Rozanski, A., & Kubzansky, L. D. (2005). Psychologic functioning and physical health: A paradigm of flexibility. Psychosomatic Medicine, 67(Suppl 1), S47–S53.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Journal of Health Psychology, 4(3), 219–247.CrossRef

50.

Giltay, E. J., Geleijnse, J. M., Zitman, F. G., Buijsse, B., & Kromhout, D. (2007). Lifestyle and dietary correlates of dispositional optimism in men: The Zutphen Elderly Study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 63(5), 483–490.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Kubzansky, L. D., Sparrow, D., Vokonas, P., & Kawachi, I. (2001). Is the glass half empty or half full? A prospective study of optimism and coronary heart disease in the normative aging study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 63(6), 910–916.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Kubzansky, L. D., & Thurston, R. C. (2007). Emotional vitality and incident coronary heart disease: Benefits of healthy psychological functioning. Archives Of General Psychiatry, 64(12), 1393–1401.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Davidson, K. W., Mostofsky, E., & Whang, W. (2010). Don’t worry, be happy: Positive affect and reduced 10-year incident coronary heart disease: The Canadian Nova Scotia Health Survey. European Heart Journal, 31(9), 1065–1070.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Koizumi, M., Ito, H., Kaneko, Y., & Motohashi, Y. (2008). Effect of having a sense of purpose in life on the risk of death from cardiovascular diseases. Journal of Epidemiology, 18(5), 191–196.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Steptoe, A., Wright, C., Kunz-Ebrecht, S. R., & Iliffe, S. (2006). Dispositional optimism and health behaviour in community-dwelling older people: Associations with healthy ageing. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11(Pt 1), 71–84.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Steptoe, A., Dockray, S., & Wardle, J. (2009). Positive affect and psychobiological processes relevant to health. Journal of Personality, 77(6), 1747–1776.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Easterlin, R. A., & Sawangfa, O. (2009). Happiness and domain satisfaction: New directions for the economics of happiness. Happiness, Economics and Politics: Towards a Multi-Disciplinary Approach, 70–94.

Titel: Measuring subjective wellbeing in patients with heart disease: relationship and comparison between health-related quality of life instruments
verfasst von: Lan Gao
Marj Moodie
Gang Chen
Publikationsdatum: 02.01.2019
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2094-y

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purposes

Methods

Results

Conclusions

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2019

Individualized health-related quality of life instrument Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP) and its adaptations: a critical appraisal

Is it possible to determine the level of functional impairment that distinguishes the patients with ADHD from those without ADHD?

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children of ill or substance abusing parents: examining factor structure and sub-group differences

Trials with proxy-reported outcomes registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR)

Exploring the item sets of the Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) measures using factor analysis

The association between life satisfaction, vitality, self-rated health, and risk of cancer