Guideline 57 - Supporting Material

Cardiac Rehabilitation

Tool Measures: Health-related quality of life
Author(s): Oldridge, N.
Reference: Oldridge, N., Guyatt, G., Jones, N.L., et al. (1991). Effects on quality of life with comprehensive rehabilitation after acute myocardial infarction. American Journal of Cardiology, 67, p.1084-1089.

Does this test measure change? Yes
Cost to use this instrument: Free with author permission
Test Method: Interviewed questionnaire
Language of the Test: English
Number of items: 26
Estimated time for patient completion: 10 minutes
Number of patients who can take test simultaneously: Unlimited
Level of staff needed to administer: Staff with minimal training
Number of staff needed to administer: One
Estimated time for staff to administer: 10 minutes
Level of staff needed to score: Staff with minimal training
Estimated time for staff to score: 5 minutes
Level of staff needed to interpret: Professional
Estimated time for staff to interpret: 5-10 minutes
Applicable patient populations: MI patient populations

Source: Neil B. Oldridge, PhD
Indiana University Center for Aging Research
Regenstrief Institute for Health Care, RG6
1001 W. Tenth St
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Email: noldridg@iupui.edu
Fax: 317-630-6611

Validation:
Hillers TK, Guyatt GH, Oldridge N, Crowe J, Willan A, Griffith L, Feeny D. Quality of life after myocardial infarction. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47(11):1287-1296.
The objective of this work was to develop and test a questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life for patients after myocardial infarction (MI). In a cross-sectional survey, 63 patients identified the most frequent and important problems following acute myocardial infarction. The Quality of Life after Myocardial Infarction (QLMI) instrument was developed on the basis of these most frequent and important problems. The QLMI was administered, along with instruments measuring health utilities, social function, and emotional function, in a randomized trial of rehabilitation versus conventional care. The most frequent and important problems fell into areas of symptoms, restriction, confidence, self-esteem, and emotions, each of which is represented in the 26-item QLMI. Effect sizes of the overall QLMI in differentiating between rehabilitation and control groups (0.35), and in detecting improvement over 12 months (1.22) were comparable or larger than any other instrument. The Pearson's correlation coefficient between QLMI administered at 8 and 12 months following AMI varied between 0.75 and 0.87 for the five domains and the overall score. We found substantial correlations of the QLMI with other measures with moderate concordance with predictions about how the instrument should behave if it is a valid measure of health-related quality of life. The QLMI demonstrates a high degree of reliability, and is more responsive than other questionnaires. Relations between the QLMI and other measures provide moderate to strong evidence of its validity in discriminating between patients following AMI according to their health-related quality of life, and in measuring changes in health-related quality of life over time.

Comments or suggestions: iucar@regenstrief.org

[Guideline Index]