BackgroundThe Quality of Life Instrument for Chronic Diseases (QLICD)-COPD (V2.0) was designed to assess the health condition of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) of patients, the influential clinical factors and the relationships between QOL and clinical objective indicators.MethodsTwo hundred and sixty-one inpatients with COPD in the acute exacerbation stage were evaluated using the QLICD-COPD (V2.0) and data on clinical objective indicators were collected. The relationships between QOL and the clinical objective indicators were determined using canonical correlation analysis.ResultsThe standardised scores for the patients in four domains, namely, physical function, psychological function, social function and a disease-specific module, were 49.00±12.91, 59.89±13.51, 68.59±11.94 and 51.84±13.58, respectively. The total score for the QOL of patients was 57.17±10.26. Two pairs of canonical variables were statistically significant (r1=0.35, p<0.0001; r2=0.26, p<0.05). These variables accounted for 45.8% and 33.8% of the variance, respectively. The levels of total protein, albumin, serum sodium and alkaline phosphatase and the percentages of neutrophils and lymphocytes were correlated with the QOL, with correlation coefficients ranging from −0.435 to 0.675.ConclusionClinicians should pay close attention to the levels of total protein, albumin, serum sodium and alkaline phosphatase and the percentages of neutrophils and lymphocytes to improve the QOL of patients.

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the diseases with the highest morbidity and mortality globally. The Quality of Life Instrument for Chronic Diseases(QLICD)-COPD(V2.0) was designed to assess the health condition of patients with COPD. The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) of patients, the influential clinical factors, and the relationships between QOL and clinical objective indicators. Methods Two hundred and sixty-one in-patients with COPD in the acute exacerbation stage were evaluated using the QLICD-COPD(V2.0) and data on clinical objective indicators were collected. The relationships between QOL and the clinical objective indicators were determined using canonical correlation analysis. Results The standardized scores for the patients in four domains, namely physical function, psychological function, social function, and a disease-specific module, were 49.00 ± 12.91, 59.89 ± 13.51, 68.59 ± 11.94, and 51.84 ± 13.58, respectively. The total score for the QOL of patients was 57.17 ± 10.26. Two pairs of canonical correlation variables were statistically significant (P < 0.05), with coefficients of 0.35 and 0.26. These variables respectively accounted for 45.8% and 33.8% of the variance. The levels of total protein, albumin, serum sodium, and alkaline phosphatase and the percentages of neutrophils and lymphocytes were correlated with the QOL. Conclusion During COPD treatment, clinicians should pay close attention to the levels of total protein, albumin, serum sodium, and alkaline phosphatase and the percentages of neutrophils and lymphocytes to improve the QOL of patients.

Objective: To develop a quality of life (QOL) instrument specific to chronic pulmonary heart disease (CPHD) and to evaluate its reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Methods: Under the Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases (QLICD) system, the QLICD-CPHD (V2.0) was developed and used to measure the QOL of 184 patients with CPHD. Data were analyzed by statistical description, linear correlation analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and paired t-test. Results: The QLICD-CPHD (V2.0) consisted of 44 items, including 28 in the general module and 16 in the specific module. The Cronbach’s α coefficients of four domains in the general module and the specific module were greater than 0.7, and the split-half reliability coefficients were between 0.6 and 0.8, indicating that the instrument has good reliability. The instrument showed good validity as the correlation coefficients among items of the same domain were significantly higher than those among items of different domains. Correlation coefficients r between the corresponding domains of SF-36 and QLICD-CPHD were between 0.26 and 0.60, which suggests that QLICD-CPHD has moderate criterion validity. Paired t-tests of scores of patients before and after treatment showed significant differences in the overall score, scores of general module domains except social role, and scores of the specific module. Standardized response means were greater than 0.2, suggesting that the instrument had moderate responsiveness and was sensitive to changes in the patients’ QOL. Conclusion: The QLICD-CPHD (V2.0) has good reliability, validity, and responsiveness. The instrument can be used to evaluate the QOL of CPHD patients.