Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:34:11.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Health-related quality of life of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal coronary artery angioplasty patients: 1-year follow-up

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2005

Eija Kattainen ,
Harri Sintonen ,
Raimo Kettunen  and
Pirkko Meriläinen
Eija Kattainen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio
Harri Sintonen
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki and STAKES
Raimo Kettunen
Affiliation:
Kuopio University Hospital and Päijät-Häme Central Hospital
Pirkko Meriläinen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) before the interventions and 6 and 12 months afterward, and to compare their HRQoL also with that of the general population.

Methods: The sample (n = 615) consisted of consecutive coronary artery disease patients treated with elective CABG (n = 432) or PTCA (n = 183). The baseline data before the treatments were collected by structured interview, the follow-up data mainly by mailed self-administered questionnaires. HRQoL was measured by the 15D. For comparisons, the groups were standardized for differences in socioeconomic and clinical characteristics with a regression analysis.

Results: At baseline, the average 15D scores of the patient groups were 0.752 (95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.743–0.761) in CABG and 0.730 (95 percent CI, 0.716–0.744) in PTCA. After standardization, the difference between the groups was statistically significant but not clinically important. These scores were significantly worse (statistically and clinically) than the score of 0.883 (95 percent CI, 0.871–0.879) in the general population sample matched with the gender and age distribution of the patients. By 6 months, the CABG and PTCA patients had experienced a statistically significant and clinically important improvement to 0.858 (95 percent CI, 0.844–0.872) and 0.824 (95 percent CI, 0.806–0.842), respectively. No significant change took place in either group from 6 to 12 months.

Conclusions: Both CABG and PTCA produces an approximately similar, clinically important improvement in HRQoL in 1-year follow-up.

Keywords

Health-related quality of lifeCABGPTCApatients
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , April 2005 , pp. 172 - 179
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arinen S, Häkkinen U, Klaukka T, et al. 1998: Suomalaisten terveys ja terveyspalvelujen käyttö [Health and use of health care services of Finnish people]. Terveys. 5.
Artinian NT, Duggan CH. 1995 Sex differences in patient recovery patterns after coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart Lung. 24: 483– 494.Google Scholar
BARI Investigators. 1997 Five-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease. A multicenter randomized trial. JAMA. 9: 715– 721.
Brorsson B, Bernstein SJ, Brook RH, Werko L. 2002 Quality of life of patients with chronic stable angina before and four years after coronary revascularisation compared with normal population. Heart. 87: 140– 145.Google Scholar
Dimopoulou I, Anthi A, Michalis A, Tzelepis GE. 2001 Functional status and quality of life in long-term survivors of cardiac arrest after cardiac surgery. Crit Care Med. 29: 1408– 1411.Google Scholar
Edell-Gustafsson U. 1999 Sleep, psychological symptoms and quality of life in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. Linköping University Medical Dissertations No 584. 10– 11.
Engblom E, Korpilahti K, Hämäläinen H, Ronnemaa T, Puukka P. 1997 Quality of life and return to work 5 years after coronary artery bypass surgery: Long term results of cardiac rehabilitation. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 17: 29– 36.Google Scholar
Finnish Heart Association. 2001 Sydänleikkausrekisteri. [Finnish Heart Surgery Register 2001].
Heikkilä J. 1992 Sepelvaltimotaudin esiintyvyys, kehityssuunnat, vaaratekijät ja ehkäisyn mahdollisuudet. [Incidence, developmental trends, risk factors and possible prevention of coronary artery disease]. Suom Laakaril. 15: 1413– 1417.Google Scholar
Herlitz J, Wiklund I, Sjöland H, et al. 2000 Impact of age on improvement in health related quality of life 5 years after coronary artery bypass grafting. Scand J Rehabil Med. 32: 41– 48.Google Scholar
Hunt JO, Hendrata MV, Myles PS. 2000 Quality of life 12 months after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Heart Lung. 29: 401– 411.Google Scholar
Jennings PM, Staggers N, Brosch LR. 1999 A classification scheme for outcome indicators. J Nurs Schol. 31: 381– 388.Google Scholar
Kauppinen R, Sintonen H, Tukiainen H. 1998 One-year economic evaluation of intensive vs. conventional patient education and supervision for self-management of new asthmatic patients. Respir Med. 98: 300– 307.Google Scholar
Kiebzak GM, Pierson LM, Cambell MBS, Cook JW. 2002 Use of the SF-36 general health status survey health-related quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: Effect of disease and response to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Heart Lung. 31: 207– 213.Google Scholar
Kind P. 2001 Measuring quality of life in evaluating clinical interventions: An overview. Ann Med. 33: 323– 327.Google Scholar
King KB, Porter LA, Rowe MA. 1994 Functional, social, and emotional outcomes in women and men in the first year following coronary artery bypass surgery. J Womens Health. 3: 347– 354.Google Scholar
Lukkarinen H. 1998 Quality of life in coronary artery disease. Nurs Res. 47: 337– 343.Google Scholar
Lukkarinen H, Hentinen M. 1998 Assessment of quality of life with the Nottingham Health Profile among patients with coronary heart disease. Heart Lung. 27: 189– 199.Google Scholar
Moore SM, Dolansky MA. 2001 Randomized trial of home recovery intervention following coronary artery bypass surgery. Res Nurs Health. 24: 93– 104.Google Scholar
Papadantonaki A, Stotts NA, Paul SM. 1994 Comparison of quality of life before and after coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Heart Lung. 23: 45– 52.Google Scholar
Pocock ST, Henderson RA, Seed P, Treasure T, Hampton JR. 1996 Quality of life, employment status, and anginal symptoms after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 3-year follow-up in randomised intervention treatment of angina (RITA) trial. Circulation. 94: 135– 142.Google Scholar
Redeker NS, Mason DJ, Wykpisz E, Glica B. 1995 Women's patterns of activity over 6 months after coronary artery bypass surgery. Heart Lung. 24: 502– 511.Google Scholar
Rissanen P, Aro S, Sintonen H, Slätis P, Paavolainen P. 1996 Quality of life and functional ability in hip and knee replacements. A prospective study. Qual Life Res. 5: 56– 64.Google Scholar
Ross AC, Ostrow L. 2001 Subjectively perceived quality of life after coronary artery bypass surgery. Am J Crit Care. 10: 11– 16.Google Scholar
Räsänen JV, Niskanen MM, Miettinen P, Sintonen H, Alhava E. 2001 Health-related quality of life before and after gastrointestinal surgery. Eur J Surg. 167: 419– 425.Google Scholar
Schipper H, Clinch JJ, Olweny CLM. 1996 Quality of life studies: Definitions and conceptual issues. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers 11– 23.
Seymour Route PA. 2001 Patients' expected and actual functional status after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. University of Massachusetts Amherst. Abstract.
Sintonen H. 1994 Outcome measurements in acid-related diseases. Pharmacoeconomics. 5: 17– 26.Google Scholar
Sintonen H. 1994b The 15D-measure of health-related quality of life. Reliability, validity and sensitivity of its health state descriptive system. National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Working paper. Melbourne. 41. Available at: http://chpe.buseco.monash.edu.au.
Sintonen H. 1995 The 15D-measure of health-related quality of life. II. Feasibility, reliability and validity of its valuation system. National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Working paper. Melbourne. 42. Available at: http://chpe.buseco.monash.edu.au.
Sintonen H. 2001 The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: Properties and applications. Ann Med. 33: 328– 335.Google Scholar
Spertus JA, Winder JA, Dewhurst TA, et al. 1995 Development and evaluation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, a new functional status measure for coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 25: 333– 241.Google Scholar
Statistics Finland 2002. Available at: http://www.tilastokeskus.fi. Accessed: August 30, 2003.
Wenger NK, Naughton MJ, Furberg CD. 1996 Cardiovascular disorders. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers 883– 891.
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. 2003 Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. 1964. Available at: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/17-c_e.html. Accessed: January 15
Währborg P. 1999 Quality of life after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. One-year follow-up in the coronary angioplasty versus bypass revascularization investigation (CABRI) trial. Eur Heart J. 20: 653– 658.Google Scholar