OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between self-rated health and major cardiovascular events in a sample of women with suspected myocardial ischemia. Previous studies showed that self-rated health is a predictor of objective health outcomes, such as mortality. METHOD: At baseline, 900 women rated their health on a 5-point scale ranging from poor to excellent as part of a protocol that included quantitative coronary angiography, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor assessment, cardiac symptoms, psychotropic medication use, and functional impairment. Participants were followed for a maximum of 9 years (median, 5.9 years) to determine the prevalence of major CVD events (myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and CVD-related death). RESULTS: A total of 354 (39.3% of sample) participants reported their health as either poor or fair. After adjusting for demographic factors, CVD risk factors, and coronary artery disease severity, women who rated their health as poor (hazard ratio, 2.1 [1.1-4.2]) or fair (hazard ratio, 2.0 [1.2-3.6]) experienced significantly shorter times to major CVD events compared with women who rated their health as excellent or very good. Further adjustment for functional impairment, however, attenuated the self-rated health relationships with major CVD events. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with suspected myocardial ischemia, self-rated health predicted major CVD events independent of demographic factors, CVD risk factors, and angiogram-defined disease severity. However, functional impairment seemed to explain much of the self-rated health association. These results support the clinical utility of self-rated health scores in women and encourage a multidimensional approach to conceptualizing these measures.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between self-rated health and major cardiovascular events in a sample of women with suspected myocardial ischemia. Previous studies showed that self-rated health is a predictor of objective health outcomes, such as mortality. METHOD: At baseline, 900 women rated their health on a 5-point scale ranging from poor to excellent as part of a protocol that included quantitative coronary angiography, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor assessment, cardiac symptoms, psychotropic medication use, and functional impairment. Participants were followed for a maximum of 9 years (median, 5.9 years) to determine the prevalence of major CVD events (myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and CVD-related death). RESULTS: A total of 354 (39.3% of sample) participants reported their health as either poor or fair. After adjusting for demographic factors, CVD risk factors, and coronary artery disease severity, women who rated their health as poor (hazard ratio, 2.1 [1.1-4.2]) or fair (hazard ratio, 2.0 [1.2-3.6]) experienced significantly shorter times to major CVD events compared with women who rated their health as excellent or very good. Further adjustment for functional impairment, however, attenuated the self-rated health relationships with major CVD events. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with suspected myocardial ischemia, self-rated health predicted major CVD events independent of demographic factors, CVD risk factors, and angiogram-defined disease severity. However, functional impairment seemed to explain much of the self-rated health association. These results support the clinical utility of self-rated health scores in women and encourage a multidimensional approach to conceptualizing these measures.
Authors: H B Bosworth; I C Siegler; B H Brummett; J C Barefoot; R B Williams; N E Clapp-Channing; D B Mark Journal: Med Care Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Noel Bairey Merz; Robert O Bonow; George Sopko; Robert S Balaban; Richard O Cannon; David Gordon; Mary M Hand; Sharonne N Hayes; Jannet F Lewis; Terry Long; Teri A Manolio; Attilio Maseri; Elizabeth G Nabel; Patrice Desvigne Nickens; Carl J Pepine; Rita F Redberg; Jacques E Rossouw; Harry P Selker; Leslee J Shaw; David D Waters Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-02-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: M A Hlatky; R E Boineau; M B Higginbotham; K L Lee; D B Mark; R M Califf; F R Cobb; D B Pryor Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1989-09-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: B L Sharaf; C J Pepine; R A Kerensky; S E Reis; N Reichek; W J Rogers; G Sopko; S F Kelsey; R Holubkov; M Olson; N J Miele; D O Williams; C N Merz Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2001-04-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Elizabeth M Mahoney; Claudine T Jurkovitz; Haitao Chu; Edmund R Becker; Steven Culler; Andrzej S Kosinski; Debbie H Robertson; Charles Alexander; Soma Nag; John R Cook; Laura A Demopoulos; Peter M DiBattiste; Christopher P Cannon; William S Weintraub Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-10-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michelle J Naughton; Robert L Brunner; Patricia E Hogan; Suzanne C Danhauer; Gretchen A Brenes; Deborah J Bowen; Beverly M Snively; Joseph S Goveas; Nazmus Saquib; Oleg Zaslavsky; Sally A Shumaker Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: John W Liang; Ying Kuen Cheung; Joshua Z Willey; Yeseon P Moon; Ralph L Sacco; Mitchell S V Elkind; Mandip S Dhamoon Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Theresa M Beckie; Gerald Fletcher; Maureen W Groer; Kevin E Kip; Ming Ji Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2015 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Beatrix Davoli Capistrant; J Robin Moon; Lisa F Berkman; M Maria Glymour Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2011-11-11 Impact factor: 6.286
Authors: Rianne M van der Linde; Nahal Mavaddat; Robert Luben; Carol Brayne; Rebecca K Simmons; Kay Tee Khaw; Ann Louise Kinmonth Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-06-03 Impact factor: 3.240