Despite major improvements in diagnostics and interventional therapies, cardiovascular diseases remain a major health care and socio-economic burden both in western and developing countries, in which this burden is increasing in close correlation to economic growth. Health authorities and the general population have started to recognize that the fight against these diseases can only be won if their burden is faced by increasing our investment on interventions in lifestyle changes and prevention. There is an overwhelming evidence of the efficacy of secondary prevention initiatives including cardiac rehabilitation in terms of reduction in morbidity and mortality. However, secondary prevention is still too poorly implemented in clinical practice, often only on selected populations and over a limited period of time. The development of systematic and full comprehensive preventive programmes is warranted, integrated in the organization of national health systems. Furthermore, systematic monitoring of the process of delivery and outcomes is a necessity. Cardiology and secondary prevention, including cardiac rehabilitation, have evolved almost independently of each other and although each makes a unique contribution it is now time to join forces under the banner of preventive cardiology and create a comprehensive model that optimizes long term outcomes for patients and reduces the future burden on health care services. These are the aims that the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation has foreseen to promote secondary preventive cardiology in clinical practice.

A large body of empirical research shows that psychosocial risk factors (PSRFs) such as low socio-economic status, social isolation, stress, type-D personality, depression and anxiety increase the risk of incident coronary heart disease (CHD) and also contribute to poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and prognosis in patients with established CHD. PSRFs may also act as barriers to lifestyle changes and treatment adherence and may moderate the effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Furthermore, there appears to be a bidirectional interaction between PSRFs and the cardiovascular system. Stress, anxiety and depression affect the cardiovascular system through immune, neuroendocrine and behavioural pathways. In turn, CHD and its associated treatments may lead to distress in patients, including anxiety and depression. In clinical practice, PSRFs can be assessed with single-item screening questions, standardised questionnaires, or structured clinical interviews. Psychotherapy and medication can be considered to alleviate any PSRF-related symptoms and to enhance HRQoL, but the evidence for a definite beneficial effect on cardiac endpoints is inconclusive. A multimodal behavioural intervention, integrating counselling for PSRFs and coping with illness should be included within comprehensive CR. Patients with clinically significant symptoms of distress should be referred for psychological counselling or psychologically focused interventions and/or psychopharmacological treatment. To conclude, the success of CR may critically depend on the interdependence of the body and mind and this interaction needs to be reflected through the assessment and management of PSRFs in line with robust scientific evidence, by trained staff, integrated within the core CR team.

The measurement of health, the effects of disease, and the impact of health care include not only an indication of changes in disease frequency and severity but also an estimate of patients' perception of health status before and after treatment. One of the more important developments in health care in the past decade may be the recognition that the patient's perspective is as legitimate and valid as the clinician's in monitoring health care outcomes. This has lead to the development of instruments to quantify the patients' perception of their health status before and after treatment. We review evidence supporting the measurement properties of the MacNew Heart Disease Health-related Quality of Life [MacNew] Questionnaire which was designed to evaluate how daily activities and physical, emotional, and social functioning are affected by coronary heart disease and its treatment. Reliability was demonstrated by using internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficients for the three domains in the Dutch, English, Farsi, German, and Spanish versions of the MacNew. With internal consistency and intraclass correlation coefficients =>0.73, reliability is high. Validity of the MacNew was examined with factor analysis and three core underlying factors, physical, emotional, and social, were identified, explaining 63.0 – 66.5% of the observed variance and replicated in the translations with psychometric data. Construct validity of the MacNew was further demonstrated by extensive substantiation of the logical relationships, defined a priori, between items and other comparison tools. The MacNew is responsive and sensitive to changes in HRQL following various interventions for patients with heart disease with 11 of 13 effect size statistics >0.80. Taking an average of 10 minutes or less to complete, the respondent-burden for the MacNew is low and its acceptability is demonstrated by response rates of over 90%. Normative data are available for patients with myocardial infarction, angina, and heart failure in the English version. The MacNew may be a valuable tool for assessing and evaluating health related quality of life in patients with heart disease.

The consequences of traumatic brain injury (TBI) for health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are poorly investigated, and a TBI-specific instrument has not previously been available. The cross-cultural development of a new measure to assess HRQoL after TBI is described here. An international TBI Task Force derived a conceptual model from previous work, constructed an initial item bank of 148 items, and then reduced the item set through two successive multicenter validation studies. The first study, with eight language versions of the QOLIBRI, recruited 1528 participants with TBI, and the second with six language versions, recruited 921 participants. The data from 795 participants from the second study who had complete Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) data were used to finalize the instrument. The final version of the QOLIBRI consists of 37 items in six scales (see Appendix ). Satisfaction is assessed in the areas of “Cognition,” “Self,” “Daily Life and Autonomy,” and “Social Relationships,” and feeling bothered by “Emotions,” and “Physical Problems.” The QOLIBRI scales meet standard psychometric criteria (internal consistency, α = 0.75–0.89, test-retest reliability, r _tt = 0.78–0.85). Test-retest reliability (r _tt = 0.68–0.87) as well as internal consistency (α = 0.81–0.91) were also good in a subgroup of participants with lower cognitive performance. Although there is one strong HRQoL factor, a six-scale structure explaining additional variance was validated by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and with Rasch modeling. The QOLIBRI is a new cross-culturally developed instrument for assessing HRQoL after TBI that fulfills standard psychometric criteria. It is potentially useful for clinicians and researchers conducting clinical trials, for assessing the impact of rehabilitation or other interventions, and for carrying out epidemiological surveys.

The QOLIBRI (Quality of Life after Brain Injury) is a novel health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) instrument specifically developed for traumatic brain injury (TBI). It provides a profile of HRQoL in six domains together with an overall score. Scale validity and factors associated with HRQoL were investigated in a multi-center international study. A total of 795 adults with brain injury were studied from 3 months to 15 years post-injury. The majority of participants (58%) had severe injuries as assessed by 24-h worst Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score. Systematic relationships were observed between the QOLIBRI and the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and SF-36. Within each scale patients with disability reported having low HRQoL in two to three times as many areas as those who had made a good recovery. The main correlates of the total QOLIBRI score were emotional state (HADS depression and anxiety), functional status (amount of help needed and outcome on the GOSE), and comorbid health conditions. Together these five variables accounted for 58% of the variance in total QOLIBRI scores. The QOLIBRI is the first tool developed to assess disease-specific HRQoL in brain injury, and it contains novel information not given by other currently available assessments.