|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
a Division of
Cardiovascular Medicine, University Hospital, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK, b British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular
Statistics Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK, c Medical Care Research
Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
Correspondence to: Dr Brown
Accepted for publication 25 November 1998
OBJECTIVES
To assess
the impact of myocardial infarction on quality of life in four year
survivors compared to data from "community norms", and to determine
factors associated with a poor quality of life.
DESIGN
Cohort study
based on the Nottingham heart attack register.
SETTING
Two district
general hospitals serving a defined urban/rural population.
SUBJECTS
All patients
admitted with acute myocardial infarction during 1992 and alive at a
median of four years.
MAIN OUTCOME
MEASURES
Short form 36 (SF 36) domain and overall scores.
RESULTS
Of 900 patients with an acute myocardial infarction in 1992, there were 476 patients alive and capable of responding to a questionnaire in 1997. The response rate was 424 (89.1%). Compared to age and sex adjusted
normative data, patients aged under 65 years exhibited impairment in
all eight domains, the largest differences being in physical
functioning (mean difference 20 points), role physical (mean difference
23 points), and general health (mean difference 19 points). In patients
over 65 years mean domain scores were similar to community norms.
Multiple regression analysis revealed that impaired quality of life was
closely associated with inability to return to work through ill health,
a need for coronary revascularisation, the use of anxiolytics,
hypnotics or inhalers, the need for two or more angina drugs, a
frequency of chest pain one or more times per week, and a Rose dyspnoea score of
2.
CONCLUSIONS
The SF 36 provides valuable additional information for the practising clinician.
Compared to community norms the greatest impact on quality of life is
seen in patients of working age. Impaired quality of life was reported
by patients unfit for work, those with angina and dyspnoea, patients
with coexistent lung disease, and those with anxiety and sleep
disturbances. Improving quality of life after myocardial infarction
remains a challenge for physicians.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS | REGISTER |