Examining the Health-Related Quality of Life after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Iran via SF-36 and SAQ

Background:
Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) is one of the major concerns all around the world. It is caused by mass of atherosclerotic plaques in the walls of coronary arteries, which ends in narrowing of veins, heart failure, angina, and Myocardial Infarction (MI). The growing need for therapeutic interventions in CVD patients illustrates the importance of paying special attention to these patients’ Quality of Life (QoL) and the vital interventions for their treatment.
Objectives:
This research aimed to evaluate patients’ QoL after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) using Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and Short Form-36 (SF-36).
Patients and Methods:
This six-month cohort study aimed to evaluate the QoL among CAD patients in Shiraz, Iran via SAQ and SF-36. The study population included all the patients who had undergone CABG and PCI in the hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences from May to December 2014. A total of 200 patients were selected for each intervention. After gaining the patients’ consent to take part in the research, 200 patients who applied for CABG and 198 patients who applied for PCI agreed to participate in the study. Pre-intervention data were gathered through a demographic data form and two valid and reliable questionnaires for QoL. The post-intervention data were also gathered six months after the treatment using the same questionnaires. Then, the data were entered in to the SPSS statistical software, version 20 and were analyzed using paired sample t-test, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, ANOVA, and Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficient.
Results:
Intervention was proved to be the most effective factor in changing the patients’ QoL (P = 0.04, mean ± SD = 4.65 ± 22.02 for PCI and 8.25 ± 22.97 for CABG using SF36; P = 0.002, mean ± SD = 10.54 ± 17.14 for PCI and 15.47 ± 16.81 for CABG using SAQ). Moreover, both intervention types boosted the patients’ QoL (P < 0.001). However, CABG appeared to be more successful in boosting the QoL compared to PCI. Additionally, although CABG did notexert any significant effects on the score of physical limitation (P = 0.74), it had impacts on all the features of SAQ.
Conclusions:
The findings revealed that although both CABG and PCI boosted the QoL, CABG was more effective in changing this factor.