Abstract
Purpose
Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) experience significant angina symptoms and lifestyle changes. Revascularization procedures can result in better patient-reported outcomes (PROs) than optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone. This study evaluates the impact of response shift (RS) on changes in PROs of patients with CAD across treatment strategies.
Methods
Data were from patients with CAD in the Alberta Provincial Project on Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) registry who completed the 16-item Canadian version of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at 2 weeks and 1 year following a coronary angiogram. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MG-CFA) was used to assess measurement invariance across treatment groups at week 2. Longitudinal MG-CFA was used to test for RS according to receipt of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone.
Results
Of the 3116 patients included in the analysis, 443 (14.2%) received CABG, 2049(65.8%) PCI, and the remainder OMT alone. The MG-CFA revealed a partial-strong invariance across the treatment groups at 2 weeks (CFI = 0.98, RMSEA [90% CI] = 0.05 [0.03, 0.06]). Recalibration RS was detected on the Angina Symptoms and Burden subscale and its magnitude in the OMT, PCI, and CABG groups were 0.32, 0.28, and 0.53, respectively. After adjusting for RS effects, the estimated target changes were largest in the CABG group and negligible in the OMT group.
Conclusion
Adjusting for RS is recommended in studies that use SAQ-CAN to assess changes in patients with CAD who have received revascularization versus OMT alone.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets used are available from the Alberta Provincial for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) registry. Though they are not freely available, researchers who fulfill the criteria for access to confidential data can contact the registry for access to the data.
Code availability
Available upon request from the authors.
References
Lavallee, D. C., Chenok, K. E., Love, R. M., Petersen, C., Holve, E., Segal, C. D., & Franklin, P. D. (2016). Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into health care to engage patients and enhance care. Health Affairs, 35(4), 575–582.
Wiklund, I. (2004). Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials: The example of health-related quality of life. Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology, 18(3), 351–363.
Deshpande, P. R., Rajan, S., Sudeepthi, B. L., & Nazir, C. A. (2011). Patient-reported outcomes: A new era in clinical research. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 2(4), 137.
Mamiya, H., Lix, L. M., Gardner, W., Bartlett, S. J., Ahmed, S., & Buckeridge, D. L. (2017). Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series—Paper 5: Patient-reported outcomes can be linked to epidemiologic measures to monitor populations and inform public health decisions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 89, 142–147.
Cruz Rivera, S., Dickens, A. P., Aiyegbusi, O. L., Flint, R., Fleetcroft, C., McPherson, D., Collis, P., & Calvert, M. J. (2021). Patient-reported outcomes in the regulatory approval of medical devices. Nature medicine, 27(12), 2067–2068.
Burke, L., Kennedy, D., Miskala, P., Papadopoulos, E., & Trentacosti, A. (2008). The use of patient-reported outcome measures in the evaluation of medical products for regulatory approval. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 84(2), 281–283.
Serruys, P. W., Morice, M.-C., Kappetein, A. P., Colombo, A., Holmes, D. R., Mack, M. J., Ståhle, E., Feldman, T. E., Van Den Brand, M., & Bass, E. J. (2009). Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(10), 961–972.
Lawton, J. S., Tamis-Holland, J. E., Bangalore, S., Bates, E. R., Beckie, T. M., Bischoff, J. M., Bittl, J. A., Cohen, M. G., DiMaio, J. M., & Don, C. W. (2022). 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: Executive summary: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation, 145(3), e4–e17.
Kappetein, A. P., van Mieghem, N. M., & Head, S. J. (2016). Revascularization options: Coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart Failure Clinics, 12(1), 135–139.
Farkouh, M. E., Domanski, M., Sleeper, L. A., Siami, F. S., Dangas, G., Mack, M., Yang, M., Cohen, D. J., Rosenberg, Y., & Solomon, S. D. (2012). Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine, 367(25), 2375–2384.
Wong, M. S., & Chair, S. Y. (2007). Changes in health-related quality of life following percutaneous coronary intervention: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(8), 1334–1342.
Staniūtė, M., & Brožaitienė, J. (2010). Changes in health-related quality of life among patients with coronary artery disease: A 2-year follow-up. Medicina, 46(12), 843.
McKee, G. (2009). Are there meaningful longitudinal changes in health related quality of life—SF36, in cardiac rehabilitation patients? European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 8(1), 40–47.
Boini, S., Briançon, S., Guillemin, F., Galan, P., & Hercberg, S. (2006). Occurrence of coronary artery disease has an adverse impact on health-related quality of life: A longitudinal controlled study. International Journal of Cardiology, 113(2), 215–222.
Sajobi, T. T., Wang, M., Awosoga, O., Santana, M., Southern, D., Liang, Z., Galbraith, D., Wilton, S. B., Quan, H., & Graham, M. M. (2018). Trajectories of health-related quality of life in coronary artery disease. Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 11(3), e003661.
Sawatzky, R., Sajobi, T. T., Brahmbhatt, R., Chan, E. K., Lix, L. M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017). Longitudinal change in response processes: A response shift perspective. Understanding and investigating response processes in validation research (pp. 251–276). Springer.
Vanier, A., Oort, F. J., McClimans, L., Ow, N., Gulek, B. G., Böhnke, J. R., Sprangers, M., Sébille, V., & Mayo, N. (2021). Response shift in patient-reported outcomes: Definition, theory, and a revised model. Quality of Life Research, 30(12), 3309–3322.
Reeve, B. B. (2010). An opportunity to refine our understanding of “response shift” and to educate researchers on designing quality research studies: Response to Ubel, Peeters, and Smith. Quality of Life Research, 19, 473–475.
Lawal, O. A., Awosoga, O., Santana, M. J., James, M. T., Southern, D. A., Wilton, S. B., Graham, M. M., Knudtson, M., Lu, M., & Quan, H. (2020). Psychometric evaluation of a Canadian version of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-CAN). Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 18(1), 1–10.
Lix, L. M., Chan, E. K., Sawatzky, R., Sajobi, T. T., Liu, J., Hopman, W., & Mayo, N. (2016). Response shift and disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease. Quality of Life Research, 25(7), 1751–1760.
Auneau-Enjalbert, L., Blanchin, M., Giral, M., Meurette, A., Morelon, E., Albano, L., Hardouin, J.-B., & Sébille, V. (2022). Investigation of measurement invariance in longitudinal health-related quality of life in preemptive or previously dialyzed kidney transplant recipients. Quality of Life Research, 31(2), 607–620.
Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S78.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.
Oort, F. J. (2005). Using structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 587–598.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables (Vol 210). John Wiley & Sons.
Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
Browne, M. W. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testing structural equation models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological bulletin, 107(2), 238.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2017). Mplus user’s guide: Statistical analysis with latent variables, user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
Oreel, T. H., Nieuwkerk, P. T., Hartog, I. D., Netjes, J. E., Vonk, A. B. A., Lemkes, J., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., Scherer-Rath, M., Henriques, J. P. S., Oort, F. J., Sprangers, M. A. G., & Verdam, M. G. E. (2022). Response shift after coronary revascularization. Quality of Life Research, 31(2), 437–450.
Gandhi, P. K., Ried, L. D., Huang, I.-C., Kimberlin, C. L., & Kauf, T. L. (2013). Assessment of response shift using two structural equation modeling techniques. Quality of Life Research, 22(3), 461–471.
Graham, M. M., Norris, C. M., Galbraith, P. D., Knudtson, M. L., & Ghali, W. A. (2006). Quality of life after coronary revascularization in the elderly. European Heart Journal, 27(14), 1690–1698.
Kulik, A. (2017). Quality of life after coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention: What do the trials tell us? Current Opinion in Cardiology, 32(6), 707–714.
Borkon, A. M., Muehlebach, G. F., House, J., Marso, S. P., & Spertus, J. A. (2002). A comparison of the recovery of health status after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 74(5), 1526–1530.
Schwartz, C. E., Bode, R., Repucci, N., Becker, J., Sprangers, M. A., & Fayers, P. M. (2006). The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: A meta-analysis of response shift. Quality of Life Research, 15(9), 1533–1550.
Schwartz, C. E., & Sendor, R. M. (1999). Helping others helps oneself: Response shift effects in peer support. Social Science & Medicine, 48(11), 1563–1575.
Ilie, G., Bradfield, J., Moodie, L., Lawen, T., Ilie, A., Lawen, Z., Blackman, C., Gainer, R., & Rutledge, R. D. (2019). The role of response-shift in studies assessing quality of life outcomes among cancer patients: A systematic review. Frontiers in Oncology, 9, 783.
Powden, C. J., Hoch, M. C., & Hoch, J. M. (2018). Examination of response shift after rehabilitation for orthopedic conditions: A systematic review. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 27(5), 469–479.
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science & Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515.
Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. (2000). Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. In C. E. Schwartz & A. G. Mirjam (Eds.), Sprangers Adaptation to changing health: Response shift in quality-of-life research. APA.
Sawatzky, R., Kwon, J.-Y., Barclay, R., Chauhan, C., Frank, L., van den Hout, W. B., Nielsen, L. K., Nolte, S., & Sprangers, M. A. (2021). Implications of response shift for micro-, meso-, and macro-level healthcare decision-making using results of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research, 30(12), 3343–3357.
Hartog, I. D., Willems, D. L., van den Hout, W. B., Scherer-Rath, M., Oreel, T. H., Henriques, J. P. S., Nieuwkerk, P. T., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2019). Influence of response shift and disposition on patient-reported outcomes may lead to suboptimal medical decisions: A medical ethics perspective. BMC Medical Ethics, 20(1), 61.
Sawatzky, R., Chan, E. K. H., Zumbo, B. D., Ahmed, S., Bartlett, S. J., Bingham, C. O., 3rd., Gardner, W., Jutai, J., Kuspinar, A., Sajobi, T., & Lix, L. M. (2017). Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series-Paper 7: Modern perspectives of measurement validation emphasize justification of inferences based on patient reported outcome scores. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 89, 154–159.
Norris, C. M., Spertus, J. A., Jensen, L., Johnson, J., Hegadoren, K. M., & Ghali, W. A. (2008). Sex and gender discrepancies in health-related quality of life outcomes among patients with established coronary artery disease. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 1(2), 123–130.
Lappalainen, L., Stenvall, H., Lavikainen, P., Miettinen, H., Martikainen, J., Sintonen, H., Tolppanen, A.-M., Roine, R. P., & Hartikainen, J. (2021). Patient-reported outcomes in coronary artery disease: The relationship between the standard, disease-specific set by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) and the generic health-related quality of life instrument 15D. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 1–10.
Sébille, V., Lix, L. M., Ayilara, O. F., Sajobi, T. T., Janssens, A. C. J. W., Sawatzky, R., Sprangers, M. A. G., & Verdam, M. G. E. (2021). Critical examination of current response shift methods and proposal for advancing new methods. Quality of Life Research, 30(12), 3325–3342.
Funding
This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Project Grant funding to Dr. Sajobi (Grant#: 400774). OAL was supported by the Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta Doctoral Research Scholarship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
OAL and TTS conceptualized and designed the study. OAL drafted the first version of the manuscript; OAL and OFA conducted data analysis and interpretation of results. TTS, OAA, MJS, and MTJ supervised OAL’s doctoral dissertation and provided input into the manuscript revision; MW was responsible for data extraction and preprocessing; MTJ, CMN, SBW, and MMG were involved in data collection and facilitated data access. All authors reviewed, critically revised, and approved the manuscript for submission.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethical approval
Ethics approval to use de-identified data from the APPROACH registry was obtained from the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB22-0804).
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Lawal, O.A., Awosoga, O.A., Santana, M.J. et al. Response shift in coronary artery disease. Qual Life Res 33, 767–776 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03564-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03564-1