Sex differences in quality of life in stroke survivors. Data from the Tinzaparin in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TAIST)

Introduction: Female sex is predictive of poor functional outcome in stroke, even after correction for prognostic factors. Poor quality of life (QoL) is observed in stroke survivors, with lower scores seen in the most disabled patients. We used data from the TAIST trial to assess the relationship between sex and QoL after ischaemic stroke. Methods: TAIST was a randomised controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of tinzaparin versus aspirin in 1,484 patients with acute ischaemic stroke. QoL was measured at 180 days post randomisation using the short-form 36 health survey which assesses QoL across eight domains. The relationship between sex and each domain was assessed using ordinal regression, both unadjusted and adjusted for key prognostics factors. Results: Of the 1,484 patients randomised into TAIST, 216 had died at 180 days post randomisation. 1,268 survivors were included in this analysis, 694 males (55%), 574 females (45%). Females tended to score lower than males across all QoL domains (apart from general health); statistically significant lower scores were seen for physical functioning (odds ratio (OR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.72), vitality (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98) and mental health (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93). The results for physical functioning and mental health remained significant after adjustment for prognostic variables (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.92; OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.95 respectively). Conclusions: QoL, in particular physical function and mental health domains, is lower in female patients after stroke. This difference persists even after correction for known prognostic factors such as age and stroke severity.

The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale

Background There is increasing international interest in the concept of mental well-being and its contribution to all aspects of human life. Demand for instruments to monitor mental well-being at a population level and evaluate mental health promotion initiatives is growing. This article describes the development and validation of a new scale, comprised only of positively worded items relating to different aspects of positive mental health: the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS). Methods WEMWBS was developed by an expert panel drawing on current academic literature, qualitative research with focus groups, and psychometric testing of an existing scale. It was validated on a student and representative population sample. Content validity was assessed by reviewing the frequency of complete responses and the distribution of responses to each item. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the scale measured a single construct. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Criterion validity was explored in terms of correlations between WEMWBS and other scales and by testing whether the scale discriminated between population groups in line with pre-specified hypotheses. Test-retest reliability was assessed at one week using intra-class correlation coefficients. Susceptibility to bias was measured using the Balanced Inventory of Desired Responding. Results WEMWBS showed good content validity. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the single factor hypothesis. A Cronbach’s alpha score of 0.89 (student sample) and 0.91 (population sample) suggests some item redundancy in the scale. WEMWBS showed high correlations with other mental health and well-being scales and lower correlations with scales measuring overall health. Its distribution was near normal and the scale did not show ceiling effects in a population sample. It discriminated between population groups in a way that is largely consistent with the results of other population surveys. Test–retest reliability at one week was high (0.83). Social desirability bias was lower or similar to that of other comparable scales. Conclusions WEMWBS is a measure of mental well-being focusing entirely on positive aspects of mental health. As a short and psychometrically robust scale, with no ceiling effects in a population sample, it offers promise as a tool for monitoring mental well-being at a population level. Whilst WEMWBS should appeal to those evaluating mental health promotion initiatives, it is important that the scale’s sensitivity to change is established before it is recommended in this context.