College of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee (Dr Oldridge and Mr Cho); Preventive Cardiology Program, Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (Dr Thomas); Stamford Hospital, Stamford, Connecticut (Dr Low); and Department of Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria (Dr Höfer).
J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2018 Mar;38(2):92-99. doi: 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000248.
The aim of this study was to validate the English version of the HeartQoL health-related quality of life questionnaire for use in patients with angina or myocardial infarction.
Patients living in the United States and referred, either for percutaneous coronary intervention or to cardiac rehabilitation, completed the HeartQoL, the Short Form-36 Health Survey, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at baseline and 3-months later. The data were analyzed for validity, reliability, and responsiveness.
Patients (n = 313 with angina and n = 97 with myocardial infarction) who were referred either for percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 164) or to cardiac rehabilitation (n = 246) completed baseline questionnaires. Patients with angina had significantly lower HeartQoL scores (poorer health-related quality of life) compared with patients with myocardial infarction. Exploratory factor analysis largely supported the 2-factor structure of the HeartQoL in both diagnoses, but further investigation is warranted. Internal consistency reliability was adequate, convergent validity correlations were significant, and discriminative validity was fully confirmed in patients with angina and largely confirmed in patients with myocardial infarction. Responsiveness was largely confirmed in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 67) and those referred to cardiac rehabilitation (n = 167) with conventional statistical tests and clinically with the effect size, a standardized measure of change.
The English HeartQoL health-related quality of life questionnaire is valid, reliable, and responsive in patients with angina and myocardial infarction allowing (1) assessment of baseline, (2) between-diagnosis comparisons, and (3) evaluation of change over time.
本研究旨在验证英文版 HeartQoL 健康相关生活质量问卷在心绞痛或心肌梗死患者中的适用性。
居住在美国的患者，经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或心脏康复转介，在基线和 3 个月后分别完成 HeartQoL、SF-36 健康调查和医院焦虑抑郁量表。对数据进行有效性、可靠性和反应性分析。
接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（n = 164）或心脏康复转介（n = 246）的心绞痛（n = 313）和心肌梗死（n = 97）患者完成了基线问卷。心绞痛患者的 HeartQoL 评分明显低于心肌梗死患者（生活质量较差）。探索性因子分析在两种诊断中基本支持 HeartQoL 的 2 因素结构，但需要进一步研究。内部一致性信度良好，收敛效度相关性显著，在心绞痛患者中具有充分的判别效度，在心肌梗死患者中基本得到确认。在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者（n = 67）和转介至心脏康复的患者（n = 167）中，通过常规统计检验和临床效果大小（衡量变化的标准化指标），基本确认了反应性。
英文版 HeartQoL 健康相关生活质量问卷在心绞痛和心肌梗死患者中具有有效性、可靠性和反应性，可用于（1）评估基线，（2）诊断间比较，（3）评估随时间的变化。
