We have located links that may give you full text access.
Subgroup Differences and Determinants of Patient-Reported Mental and Physical Health in Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease: Results From the DenHeart Study.
Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing 2019 May 24
BACKGROUND: A growing population is living with ischemic heart disease (IHD). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are reliable prognostic tools. Studies exploring PROs are needed to identify vulnerable patients and guide targeted healthcare strategies.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to (i) describe PROs at hospital discharge across 3 diagnostic subgroups: (1) chronic IHD/stable angina, (2) non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI)/unstable angina, and (3) ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and (ii) examine determinants for PROs at hospital discharge in patients with IHD.
METHODS: This study included a national cohort with register-data linkage including 14 115 adults with IHD discharged from Danish heart centers. Eligible patients (n = 13 476) were invited to complete a questionnaire, and 7 167 (53%) responded. Questionnaires included the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 12, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EuroQoL, HeartQoL, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, and ancillary questions. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from national registers. Student t test, χ test, and adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate subgroup differences, and adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore determinants for PROs.
RESULTS: Statistically significant subgroup differences were found, with groups reporting worst to best scores for most of PROs being as follows: chronic IHD/stable angina, non-STEMI/unstable angina, and STEMI. Symptoms of anxiety were highly prevalent in the non-STEMI/unstable angina group, with 33.8% exceeding a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety cutoff score indicating a possible anxiety disorder. Determinants for worse PROs included female sex, lower educational level, obesity, and poor physical fitness.
CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in PROs across IHD subgroups were observed and determinants for poor outcomes suggested. Results may guide differentiated care initiatives and resource allocation for preventative strategies.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to (i) describe PROs at hospital discharge across 3 diagnostic subgroups: (1) chronic IHD/stable angina, (2) non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI)/unstable angina, and (3) ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and (ii) examine determinants for PROs at hospital discharge in patients with IHD.
METHODS: This study included a national cohort with register-data linkage including 14 115 adults with IHD discharged from Danish heart centers. Eligible patients (n = 13 476) were invited to complete a questionnaire, and 7 167 (53%) responded. Questionnaires included the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 12, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EuroQoL, HeartQoL, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, and ancillary questions. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from national registers. Student t test, χ test, and adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate subgroup differences, and adjusted linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore determinants for PROs.
RESULTS: Statistically significant subgroup differences were found, with groups reporting worst to best scores for most of PROs being as follows: chronic IHD/stable angina, non-STEMI/unstable angina, and STEMI. Symptoms of anxiety were highly prevalent in the non-STEMI/unstable angina group, with 33.8% exceeding a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety cutoff score indicating a possible anxiety disorder. Determinants for worse PROs included female sex, lower educational level, obesity, and poor physical fitness.
CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in PROs across IHD subgroups were observed and determinants for poor outcomes suggested. Results may guide differentiated care initiatives and resource allocation for preventative strategies.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app