Display options
Share it on

Brain Sci. 2020 May 22;10(5). doi: 10.3390/brainsci10050316.

Evaluation of Psychological Stress Parameters in Coronary Patients by Three Different Questionnaires as Pre-Requisite for Comprehensive Rehabilitation.

Brain sciences

Ana Maria Pah, Nicoleta Florina Buleu, Anca Tudor, Ruxandra Christodorescu, Dana Velimirovici, Stela Iurciuc, Maria Rada, Gheorghe Stoichescu-Hogea, Marius Badalica-Petrescu, Doina Georgescu, Dorina Nutiu, Mircea Iurciuc, Simona Dragan

Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiology, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.
  2. Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, 300020 Timisoara, Romania.
  3. Department of Functional Sciences, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.
  4. Department of Internal Medicine, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.

PMID: 32455944 PMCID: PMC7288090 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci10050316

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Negative psychological conditions are common in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Although depression has been scrutinized over the years in these patients, only recently has anxiety emerged as another important risk factor. The purpose of this study was to compare the parameters of psychological stress in a population of coronary patients with and without myocardial revascularization procedures and to analyze lifestyle and socio-economic contributors to the state of health of these patients before inclusion in a comprehensive individualized rehabilitation program.

METHODS: This study included 500 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in stable condition divided in 2 groups: 200 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) (Group 1) and 300 patients without myocardial revascularization (Group 2) with stable angina or thrombolyzed myocardial infarction. The protocol included screening for anxiety/depression after procedure using three different scales: Duke Anxiety-Depression Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Type D Personality Scale (DS-14) scale that evaluates negative affectivity (NA) and social inhibition (SI).

RESULTS: Significant differences between groups were observed for HAD-A (9.1 ± 4.18 for Group 1 vs. 7.8 ± 4.03 for Group 2,

CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in this study provide a framework for monitoring anxiety, depression and type D personality in coronary patients before inclusion in comprehensive rehabilitation programs. Behavioral and psychological stress responses in patients with CAD significantly correlate with risk factors, and could influence the evolution of the disease. Moreover, other factors like gender, income and marital status also seem to play a decisive role. Evaluation of psychological stress parameters contributes to a better individualization at the start of these programs, because it allows adjusting of all potential factors that may influence positive outcomes.

Keywords: anxiety; comprehensive rehabilitation; coronary artery disease; depression; psychological stress parameters

References

  1. Med Care. 2005 Feb;43(2):189-93 - PubMed
  2. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015 Jul-Aug;30(4):351-9 - PubMed
  3. Fam Med. 1997 Mar;29(3):177-81 - PubMed
  4. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2002 May-Jun;15(3):183-90 - PubMed
  5. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2020 Mar;27(4):394-406 - PubMed
  6. Pol Arch Intern Med. 2017 Apr 28;127(4):267-277 - PubMed
  7. BMC Public Health. 2019 Feb 26;19(1):232 - PubMed
  8. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018 Sep 12;20(11):104 - PubMed
  9. Kardiol Pol. 2016;74(2):127-34 - PubMed
  10. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2015 Jun;72(2):503-7 - PubMed
  11. Psychosom Med. 2018 Jan;80(1):95-102 - PubMed
  12. J Ment Health. 2017 Jun;26(3):212-219 - PubMed
  13. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017 Sep;24(13):1371-1380 - PubMed
  14. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 Mar 2;:1-11 - PubMed
  15. BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Dec 16;14:354 - PubMed
  16. Am J Kidney Dis. 2014 May;63(5):820-34 - PubMed
  17. BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 22;16:259 - PubMed
  18. Eur Heart J. 2016 Aug 1;37(29):2315-2381 - PubMed
  19. Psychosom Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;67(1):89-97 - PubMed
  20. Psychiatr Pol. 2012 Jan-Feb;46(1):63-74 - PubMed
  21. Clin Interv Aging. 2018 Apr 18;13:651-656 - PubMed
  22. J Psychosom Res. 2002 Feb;52(2):69-77 - PubMed
  23. J Thorac Dis. 2017 May;9(5):E503-E506 - PubMed
  24. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 Oct 4;15(1):193 - PubMed
  25. Arch Cardiol Mex. 2019;89(3):242-247 - PubMed
  26. Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 30;168(2):934-45 - PubMed
  27. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361-70 - PubMed
  28. Heart Views. 2017 Jul-Sep;18(3):109-114 - PubMed
  29. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2016 Jun;29(2):91-9 - PubMed
  30. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2017 Sep;45(Suppl 5):32-34 - PubMed
  31. Diabetologia. 2018 Dec;61(12):2461-2498 - PubMed
  32. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2018 Nov;111(5):676-683 - PubMed
  33. Nurs Res Pract. 2018 Nov 25;2018:4181952 - PubMed
  34. Neth Heart J. 2016 Sep;24(9):538-43 - PubMed

Publication Types