Paper
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
This presentation is part of : Methodological Issues
The Psychometric Properties of Four Quality of Life Instruments Used in Cardiovascular Populations
Holli A. DeVon, PhD, RN, College of Nursing, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA and Carol Estwing Ferrans, PhD, RN, FAAN, College of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Learning Objective #1: Describe four measures of reliability and three measures of validity to use when evaluating QoL instruments
Learning Objective #2: Identify two instruments with strong support for reliability and validity which measure comprehensive QoL in patients with cardiovascular disease
Background/Purpose Quality of life (QoL) is a complex concept that has become a prominent concern to practitioners caring for those with cardiovascular (CV) disease. Technological advances and resultant high costs of health care have led society to reassess the value of quantity of life and embrace the value of quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the psychometric properties of four quality of life instruments used in studies of patients with CV disease.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The CINAHL and Medline databases were searched for QoL studies used in patients with CV diagnoses. Instruments evaluated were the Quality of Life Index-Cardiac Version III, the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, the MacNew Heart Disease Questionnaire, and the Short Form Health Survey-36. Evaluation of psychometric properties included estimations of validity, reliability, and responsiveness.

RESULTS Each of the instruments demonstrated internal consistency and retest reliability. Each was shown to be valid measures of their stated constructs. The QLI-III was found to be a psychometrically sound tool for the comprehensive assessment of quality of life in both women and men. The SAQ demonstrated reliability, validity, and responsiveness for use in patients with angina. It was particularly sensitive to changes in clinical status. The MacNew was found to be a reliable and valid measure of QoL in early testing. The SF-36 is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of health status. Of the four tools, it has been tested the most extensively. Responsiveness to change in functional status was not demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS The four instruments evaluated here have been shown to be reliable and valid measures of quality of life (QLI-III & MacNew), functional status (SAQ), and health status (SF-36) for patients with cardiovascular diagnoses. Responsiveness to changes in clinical status was demonstrated by both the QLI-III and the SAQ.

Back to Methodological Issues
Back to Evidence-Based Nursing: Strategies for Improving Practice
Sigma Theta Tau International
July 21, 2004