4.2 Article

Validation of the chinese version of the MacNew heart disease health-related quality of life questionnaire

Journal

JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 326-335

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00863.x

Keywords

angina; coronary heart disease; health-related quality of life; heart failure; myocardial infraction; psychometric properties

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Patient-reported outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQL) describe or characterize what patients have experienced as a result of their health care. However, treatment outcome comparisons among different pure or mixed populations of patients with myocardial infarction, angina or heart failure cannot be made using existing coronary heart disease (CHD)-specific HRQL instruments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the MacNew in a cohort of Hong Kong patients diagnosed with CHD. Chinese translations of a CHD-specific HRQL instrument, the MacNew Heart Disease HRQL questionnaire (MacNew), the Short-form 36 Health Survey and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were administered to 365 Chinese-speaking patients with CHD at baseline and again 3 months later (n = 363). The Medical Outcomes Trust Scientific Advisory Committee criteria were used to examine the psychometric properties of the Chinese MacNew Heart Disease HRQL questionnaire. The results warrant recommending the use of the MacNew as an outcome measure to enhance treatment evaluation in Chinese patients with CHD and a diagnosis of myocardial infarction, angina or heart failure, substantiating previous psychometric data on the MacNew in a number of different studies in patients speaking seven different languages. The MacNew questionnaire may have value as a core CHD questionnaire for treatment outcome comparisons among pure or mixed populations of patients with myocardial infarction, angina or heart failure.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available