Comparison of three quality of life questionnaires in heart failure patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation

Heart failure is a severe chronic disease and has a negative impact on the Health-related quality of life (HRQL). In addition to preventing disease progress, one of the important goals in heart failure treatment is to improve the patient’s quality of life. This study is aimed to compare three generic to specific quality of life instruments that are used in cardiac rehabilitation setting in patients with heart failure. Three instruments for the assessment of quality of life, the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and two disease-specific including quality of life after myocardial infarction questionnaire (MacNew), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF) were administered to 60 patients with heart failure participating in cardiac rehabilitation program. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, and 3 months after rehabilitation. All patients categorized based the New York Heart Association NYHA functional classification. The reliability analysis and other measures were calculated in SPSS 16. Pearson correlation coefficients in similar scales were positive in two disease-specific questionnaires (p < 0.05). Pearson correlation between the baseline MacNew general scale and all MLHF scales are positive and significant. Pearson correlation coefficients between 3-month follow up scores on the all MacNew scales and MLHF were significant (p ≤0.05). Changes on the MacNew mental and total scales and MLHF physical and general scales correlated significantly (p < 0.01). Internal consistency ranged from 0.64 to 0.76 for the MLHF and from 0.73 to 0.93 for the MacNew. There were significant difference between NYHA classification level II and III on the mental and total scales MLHF. The MacNew HRQL instruments according to change in NYHA classification level were not significant. We conclude that the MLHF and MacNew are both reliable and valuable and in heart failure patients, that MLHF discriminates better between severity grade baselines, that HRQL improves over 3 months with both measures, that the MLHF mental and total scale has the largest. α Chronbach.