4.5 Article

Educational Level and the Quality of Life of Heart Failure Patients: A Longitudinal Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC FAILURE
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 47-53

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2010.08.005

Keywords

Socioeconomic factors; hospitalization; psychosocial resources; health disparities

Funding

  1. Netherlands Heart Foundation [2000Z003]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Lower education in heart failure (HF) patients is associated with high levels of anxiety, limited physical functioning, and an increased risk of hospitalization. We examined whether educational level is related to longitudinal differences in quality of life (QoL) in HF patients. Methods and Results: This research is a substudy of the Coordinating study evaluating Outcomes of Advising and Counselling in Heart failure (COACH). QoL of 553 HF patients (mean age 69, 38% female, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 33%) was assessed during their hospitalization and at 4 follow-up measurements after discharge. In total 32% of the patients had very low, 24% low, 32% medium, and 12% high education. Patients with low educational levels reported the worst QoL. Significant differences between educational groups (P < .05) were only reported in physical functioning, social functioning, energy/fatigue, pain, and limitations in role functioning related to emotional problems. Longitudinal results show that a significantly higher proportion of high-educated patients improved in functional limitations related to emotional problems over time compared with lower-educated patients (P < .05). Conclusions: Patients with low educational levels reported the worst physical and functional condition. High-educated patients improved more than the other patients in functional limitations related to emotional problems over time. Low-educated patients may require different levels of intervention to improve their physical and functional condition. (J Cardiac Fail 2011;17:47-53)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available