Assessment of generic health-related quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication.

OBJECTIVES

to measure quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication and evaluate the ability of patients and vascular surgeons to make a similar assessment.

DESIGN, MATERIALS AND METHODS: in this prospective study patients with intermittent claudication attending two vascular clinics were asked to complete a generic health-related quality of life instrument (MOS SF-36). Patient quality of life and vascular surgeons' assessment of patient quality of life were further evaluated using a single question/adjectival scale response combination.

RESULTS

patients' self-assessment of their quality of life correlated better with the SF-36 score than did the surgeons' assessment. There was little correlation between the surgeons' and patients' own assessment of quality of life. The surgeons differed significantly from each other in their assessments. Claudicants had lower SF-36 scores than population norms in pain and physical aspects of quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

claudicants have worse quality of life than the general population, with pain and physical limitations being the most important domains. Surgeons predict the quality of life of claudicating patients less accurately than patients do themselves, and may differ from their colleagues in such assessments. Objective quality of life assessment in claudicants should be undertaken before treatment is decided.