García-Sánchez Estrella, Santamaría-Peláez Mirian, Benito Figuerola Eva, Carballo García María José, Chico Hernando Miguel, García García Juan Marcos, González-Bernal Jerónimo J, González-Santos Josefa
Cardiac Rehabilitation Unit, Rehabilitation Service, University Hospital of Burgos, 09006 Burgos, Spain.
Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Burgos, Paseo de los Comendadores s/n, 09001 Burgos, Spain.
J Clin Med. 2024 Oct 13;13(20):6106. doi: 10.3390/jcm13206106.
: Cardiovascular diseases are one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Health-related quality of life is crucial to assess the impact of cardiovascular diseases and to guide therapeutic strategies. The Short Form 36 Health Survey and the RAND 36-Item Health Survey questionnaires are common tools for measuring health-related quality of life in patients with cardiovascular disease, but their reliability may vary according to the population studied. The aim of this study is to compare the reliability of the SF-36 and the RAND-36 in a population with cardiac pathology, addressing the question of which of these instruments offers a more consistent and useful measurement in this specific group. : A cross-sectional observational study was carried out at the University Hospital of Burgos (Spain). A total of 413 patients with cardiovascular pathology referred to the Cardiac Rehabilitation Unit were included. Patients with incomplete data or who did not participate in the program were excluded. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), item-total correlation and reliability, and a half-and-half analysis were performed. : Both questionnaires showed similar and adequate reliability for patients with cardiovascular pathology. Internal consistency, as measured with Cronbach's alpha, was above 0.80 for most dimensions, supporting its robustness. Significant inter-item and inter-dimension correlations were found in both scales, except in some specific cases in the dimension 'Physical Functioning'. The half-and-half analysis confirmed the good reliability of both scales. : Both the SF-36 and the RAND-36 are highly reliable tools for assessing health-related quality of life in patients with cardiovascular disease. The results may have significant implications for clinical practice, helping in the selection of health-related quality of life monitoring instruments and in the evaluation of the efficacy of therapeutic interventions.
心血管疾病是全球发病和死亡的主要原因之一。健康相关生活质量对于评估心血管疾病的影响以及指导治疗策略至关重要。简明健康调查问卷36项（Short Form 36 Health Survey）和兰德36项健康调查问卷（RAND 36-Item Health Survey）是测量心血管疾病患者健康相关生活质量的常用工具，但它们的可靠性可能因所研究的人群而异。本研究的目的是比较SF-36和RAND-36在患有心脏疾病人群中的可靠性，探讨在这一特定群体中哪种工具能提供更一致且有用的测量结果。
在西班牙布尔戈斯大学医院开展了一项横断面观察性研究。共纳入413名转诊至心脏康复科的心血管疾病患者。排除数据不完整或未参与该项目的患者。进行了内部一致性（克朗巴哈系数）、项目与总分相关性及可靠性分析，以及对半分析。
对于心血管疾病患者，两种问卷均显示出相似且足够的可靠性。用克朗巴哈系数测量的内部一致性，在大多数维度上高于0.80，证明了其稳健性。在两个量表中均发现了显著的项目间和维度间相关性，但在“身体功能”维度的某些特定情况下除外。对半分析证实了两个量表的良好可靠性。
SF-36和RAND-36都是评估心血管疾病患者健康相关生活质量的高度可靠工具。研究结果可能对临床实践具有重要意义，有助于选择健康相关生活质量监测工具以及评估治疗干预措施的疗效。
