Measuring the health-related quality of life of people with ischaemic heart disease.

Objectives—To inform researchers and clinicians about the most appropriate generic and disease specific measures of health related quality of life for use among people with ischaemic heart disease. Methods—MEDLINE and BIDS were searched for research papers which contained a report of at least one of the three most common generic instruments or at least one of the five disease specific instruments used with ischaemic heart disease patients. Evidence for the validity, reliability, and sensitivity of these instruments was critically appraised. Results—Of the three generic measures—the Nottingham health profile, sickness impact profile, and short form 36 (SF-36)—the SF-36 appears to offer the most reliable, valid, and sensitive assessment of quality of life. However, a few of the SF-36 subscales lack a sufficient degree of sensitivity to detect change in a patient’s clinical condition. According to the best available evidence, the quality of life after myocardial infarction questionnaire should be preferred to the Seattle angina questionnaire, the quality of life index cardiac version, the angina pectoris quality of life questionnaire, and the summary index. Overall, research on disease specific measures is sparse compared to the number of studies which have investigated generic measures. Conclusions—An assessment of the quality of life of people with ischaemic heart disease should comprise a disease specific measure in addition to a generic measure. The SF-36 and the quality of life after myocardial infarction questionnaire (version 2) are the most appropriate currently available generic and disease specific measures of health related quality of life, respectively. Further research into the measurement of health related quality of life of people with ischaemic heart disease is required in order to address the problems (such as lack of sensitivity to detect change) identified by the review.

Selecting a measure of health-related quality of life.

Quality of life is becoming recognized increasingly as an important outcome measure which needs to be considered by social workers. However, there does not appear to be a clear consensus about the definition of quality of life. In addition, social workers are likely to experience difficulties choosing and applying an appropriate instrument with which to measure quality of life because of the many available instruments purporting to assess quality of life. This paper discusses the definition of health-related quality of life and explains the main measurement properties of an instrument that must be appraised when considering whether or not an instrument is appropriate. The paper will assist social workers to make an informed choice about measures of health-related quality of life.

Generic, disease-specific and individualised approaches to measuring health-related quality of life among people with heart disease - a comparative analysis.

Increasing emphasis is being placed on the evaluation of health-related quality of life. However, there is no consensus on the definition of this concept and as a result there are a plethora of existing measurement instruments. Head-to-head comparisons of the psychometric properties of existing instruments are necessary to facilitate evidence-based decisions about which instrument should be chosen for routine use. Therefore, an individualised instrument (the modified Patient Generated Index), a generic instrument (the Short Form 36) and a disease-specific instrument (the Quality of Life after Myocardial Infarction questionnaire) were administered to patients with ischaemic heart disease (n=117) and the evidence for the validity, reliability and sensitivity of each instrument was examined and compared. The modified Patient Generated Index compared favourably with the other instruments but none of the instruments examined provided sound evidence for sensitivity to change. Therefore, any recommendation for the use of the individualised approach in the routine collection of health-related quality of life data in clinical practice must be conditional upon the submission of further evidence to support the sensitivity of such instruments.

Improving the quality of life for patients with angina pectoris: a team approach to disease management.

The evaluation of outcome of management of angina patients is now inextricably linked with an assessment of quality of life. Angina, as a manifestation of coronary heart disease, is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in many countries. Optimal management of patients with angina is of undeniable national and global significance.

This paper attempts to indicate the importance of a team approach and the implications for patients’ quality of life of involving professionals with a variety of different skills. It outlines current guidelines for the management of angina, including aspects of diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation. Factors of relevance to the management of patients as individuals are discussed. The association of improved quality of life and reduced severity of symptoms with benefit for both the individual and society is considered.

Disruption of the langerin/CD207 Gene Abolishes Birbeck Granules without a Marked Loss of Langerhans Cell Function

Langerin is a C-type lectin expressed by a subset of dendritic leukocytes, the Langerhans cells (LC). Langerin is a cell surface receptor that induces the formation of an LC-specific organelle, the Birbeck granule (BG). We generated a langerin(-/-) mouse on a C57BL/6 background which did not display any macroscopic aberrant development. In the absence of langerin, LC were detected in normal numbers in the epidermis but the cells lacked BG. LC of langerin(-/-) mice did not present other phenotypic alterations compared to wild-type littermates. Functionally, the langerin(-/-) LC were able to capture antigen, to migrate towards skin draining lymph nodes, and to undergo phenotypic maturation. In addition, langerin(-/-) mice were not impaired in their capacity to process native OVA protein for I-A(b)-restricted presentation to CD4(+) T lymphocytes or for H-2K(b)-restricted cross-presentation to CD8(+) T lymphocytes. langerin(-/-) mice inoculated with mannosylated or skin-tropic microorganisms did not display an altered pathogen susceptibility. Finally, chemical mutagenesis resulted in a similar rate of skin tumor development in langerin(-/-) and wild-type mice. Overall, our data indicate that langerin and BG are dispensable for a number of LC functions. The langerin(-/-) C57BL/6 mouse should be a valuable model for further functional exploration of langerin and the role of BG.

Visual functioning and quality of life in the subfoveal radiotherapy study (SFRADS): SFRADS report 2

Aims: To determine whether or not self reported visual functioning and quality of life in patients with choroidal neovascularisation caused by age related macular degeneration (AMD) is better in those treated with 12 Gy external beam radiotherapy in comparison with untreated subjects. Methods: A multicentre single masked randomised controlled trial of 12 Gy of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) delivered as 6x2 Gy fractions to the macula of an affected eye versus observation. Patients with AMD, aged 60 years or over, in three UK hospital units, who had subfoveal CNV and a visual acuity equal to or better than 6/60 (logMAR 1.0). Methods: Data from 199 eligible participants who were randomly assigned to 12 Gy teletherapy or observation were available for analysis. Visual function assessment, ophthalmic examination, and fundus fluorescein angiography were undertaken at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after study entry. To assess patient centred outcomes, subjects were asked to complete the Daily Living Tasks Dependent on Vision (DLTV) and the SF-36 questionnaires at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months after enrolment to the study. Cross sectional and longitudinal analyses were conducted using arm of study as grouping variable. Regression analysis was employed to adjust for the effect of baseline co-variates on outcome at 12 months and 24 months. Results: Both control and treated subjects had significant losses in visual functioning as seen by a progressive decline in mean scores in the four dimensions of the DLTV. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment and control subjects in any of dimensions of the DLTV at 12 months or 24 months after study entry. Regression analysis confirmed that treatment status had no effect on the change in DLTV dimensional scores. Conclusions: The small benefits noted in clinical measures of vision in treated eyes did not translate into better self reported visual functioning in patients who received treatment when compared with the control arm. These findings have implications for the design of future clinical trials and studies.