Background: Quality of life (QOL) instruments help to integrate the patient's view into clinical practice and into the evaluation of new therapeutic strategies. The aim of the present study was to determine which of two generic QOL instruments, the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) or the Short Form Health Survey (SF36), was the more suitable for use in cardiac surgery.
Methods: The NHP and the SF36 were compared before and 5 weeks after surgery. Comparison was conducted in two stages: (1) the acceptability and psychometric properties of the tools were measured, and (2) the short-time evolution of angina pectoris and dyspnea status were assessed with the QOL.
Results: A total of 322 patients were included and 299 patients completed preoperative and postoperative questionnaires. Acceptability was similar for both questionnaires. Internal consistency, ceiling effect, sensitivity to change, as well as the assessment of the evolution of angina pectoris and dyspnea were better for the SF36 than for the NHP.
Conclusions: The SF36 seems more suitable than the NHP for evaluating QOL in cardiac surgery.