Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-58z7q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-04T15:58:29.877Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Types of social supports predicting health-related quality of life among adult patients with CHD in the Institut Jantung Negara (National Heart Institute), Malaysia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2016

Sue K. Tye*
Patient Counseling Department, Institut Jantung Negara, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Geetha Kandavello
Patient Counseling Department, Institut Jantung Negara, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Kah L. Gan
Patient Counseling Department, Institut Jantung Negara, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Correspondence to: S. K. Tye, Patient Counseling Department, Institut Jantung Negara, 145, Jalan Tun Razak, 50586 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Tel: +6 016 461 3087; Fax: +603 2692 8395; E-mail:,



The objectives of this study were to examine which types of social supports – emotional/informational support, tangible support, affectionate support, and positive interactions – are the predictors of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients with CHD and to assess the influence of demographic variables and clinical factors on these variables.


In total, 205 adult patients with CHD from the National Heart Institute, Malaysia, were recruited. Patients were first screened by cardiology consultants to ensure they fit the inclusion criteria before filling in questionnaires, which were medical outcome studies – social support survey and AQoL-8D.


All social supports and their subscales were found to have mild-to-moderate significant relationships with physical dimension, psychological dimension, and overall HRQoL; however, only positive interaction, marital status, and types of diagnosis were reported as predictors of HRQoL. Surprisingly, with regard to the physical dimension of quality of life, social supports were not significant predictors, but educational level, marital status, and types of diagnosis were significant predictors. Positive interaction, affectionate support, marital status, and types of diagnosis were again found to be predictors in the aspects of the psychological dimension of quality of life. In conclusion, positive interaction and affectionate support, which include elements of fun, relaxation, love, and care, should be included in the care of adult patients with CHD.

Original Articles
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


1. Marelli, AJ, Mackie, AS, Ionescu-Ittu, R, Rahme, E, Pilote, L. Congenital heart disease in the general population: changing prevalence and age distribution. Circulation 2007; 115: 163172.Google Scholar
2. van der Bom, T, Bouma, BJ, Meijboom, FJ, Zwinderman, AH, Mulder, BJM. The prevalence of adult congenital heart disease, results from a systematic review and evidence based calculation. Am Heart J 2012; 164: 568575.Google Scholar
3. Eslami, B, Macassa, G, Sundin, O, Khankeh, HR, Soares, JJ. Quality of life and life satisfaction among adults with and without congenital heart disease in a developing country. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2015; 22: 169179.Google Scholar
4. Areias, MEG, Pinto, CI, Vieira, PF, et al. Long term psychosocial outcomes of congenital heart disease (CHD) in adolescents and young adults. Transl Pediatr 2013; 2: 9098.Google Scholar
5. Lane, DA, Lip, GY, Millane, TA. Quality of life in adults with congenital heart disease. Heart 2002; 88: 7175.Google Scholar
6. Silva, AM, Vaz, C, Areias, MEG, et al. Quality of life of patients with congenital heart diseases. Cardiol Young 2011; 21: 670676.Google Scholar
7. Simko, LC, McGinnis, KA. Quality of life experienced by adults with congenital heart disease. AACN Clin Issues 2003; 14: 4253.Google Scholar
8. Pahl, E, Grady, KL. Pediatric heart transplantation: transitioning to adult care. Int Soc Heart Lung Transplant 2012; 3: 12.Google Scholar
9. Kovacs, AH, Saidi, AS, Kuhl, EA, et al. Depression and anxiety in adult congenital heart disease: predictors and prevalence. Int J Cardiol 2009; 137: 158164.Google Scholar
10. Teixeira, FM, Coelho, RM, Proença, C, et al. Quality of life experienced by adolescents and young adults with congenital heart disease. Pediatr Cardiol 2011; 32: 11321138.Google Scholar
11. Kulik, JA, Mahler, HI. Social support and recovery from surgery. Health Psychol 1989; 8: 221238.Google Scholar
12. Bons, L, Ploeg, M. Do adults with congenital heart disease have a good quality of life? A systematic review. Erasmus J Med 2012; 2: 1619.Google Scholar
13. Fekkes, M, Kamphuis, RP, Ottenkamp, J, et al. Health-related quality of life in young adults with minor congenital heart disease. Psychol Health 2001; 16: 239250.Google Scholar
14. Immer, FF, Althaus, SM, Berdat, PA, Saner, H, Carrel, TP. Quality of life and specific problems after cardiac surgery in adolescents and adults with congenital heart diseases. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2005; 12: 138143.Google Scholar
15. Moons, P, Van Deyk, K, De Bleser, L, et al. Quality of life and health status in adults with congenital heart disease: a direct comparison with healthy counterparts. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2006; 13: 407413.Google Scholar
16. Moons, P, Van Deyk, K, Marquet, K, De Bleser, L, De Geest, S, Budts, W. Profile of adults with congenital heart disease having a good, moderate, or poor quality of life: a cluster analytic study, Eur. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2009; 8: 151157.Google Scholar
17. Gill, TM, Feinstein, AR. A critical appraisal of the quality of quality-of-life measurements. JAMA 1994; 272: 619626.Google Scholar
18. Ferrans, CE. Quality of life: conceptual issues. Semin Oncol Nurs 1990; 6: 248254.Google Scholar
19. Warnes, CA, Liberthson, R, Danielson, GK, et al. Task force 1: the changing profile of congenital heart disease in adult life. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 11701175.Google Scholar
20. Saliba, Z, Butera, G, Bonnet, D, et al. Quality of life and perceived health status in surviving adults with univentricular heart. Heart 2001; 86: 6973.Google Scholar
21. Richardson, J, Elsworth, G, Iezzi, A, et al. Increasing the sensitivity of the AQoL inventory for the evaluation of interventions affecting mental health, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, 2011.Google Scholar
22. Richardson, J, Sinha, K, Iezzi, A, Khan, MA. Modelling the Utility of Health States with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D instrument: overview and utility scoring algorithm, Centre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, 2011.Google Scholar
23. Sherbourne, CD, Stewart, AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med 1991; 32: 705714.Google Scholar
24. Green, SB. How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivar Behav Res 1991; 26: 499510.Google Scholar
25. Harris, RJ. A Primer of Multivariate Statistics, 2nd edn. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1985.Google Scholar
26. Glasser, W. Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom. HarperCollins, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
27. Stuckey, HL, Nobel, J. The connection between art, healing, and public health: a review of current literature. Am J Public Health 2010; 100: 254263.Google Scholar
28. Erdman, L. Laughter therapy for patients with cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol 1994; 11: 5567.Google Scholar
29. Apers, S, Moons, P, Goossens, E, et al. Sense of coherence and perceived physical health explain the better quality of life in adolescents with congenital heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2013; 12: 475483.Google Scholar
30. Moons, P, Norekvål, TM. Is sense of coherence a pathway for improving the quality of life of patients who grow up with chronic diseases? A hypothesis. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2006; 5: 1620.Google Scholar
31. Martire, LM, Schulz, R, Helgeson, VH, Small, BJ, Saghafi, EM. Review and meta-analysis of couple-oriented interventions for chronic illness. Ann Behav Med 2010; 40: 325342.Google Scholar
32. Hartmann, M, Bäzner, E, Wild, B, Eisler, I, Herzog, W. Effects of interventions involving the family in the treatment of adult patients with chronic physical diseases: a meta-analysis. Psychother Psychosom 2010; 79: 136148.Google Scholar
33. Filazoglu, G, Griva, K. Coping and social support and health related quality of life in women with breast cancer in Turkey. Psychol Health Med 2008; 13: 559573.Google Scholar
34. Jacobson, DE. Types and timing of social support. J Health Soc Behav 1986; 27: 250264.Google Scholar
35. Kools, S, Tong, EM, Hughes, R, Jayne, R, Scheibly, K, Gilliss, CL. Hospital experiences of young adults with congenital heart disease: divergence in expectations and dissonance in care. Am J Crit Care 2002; 11: 115125.Google Scholar
36. Claessens, P, Moons, P, De Casterlé, BD, Cannaerts, N, Budts, W, Gewillig, M. What does it mean to live with a congenital heart disease? A qualitative study on the lived experiences of adult patients. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2005; 4: 310.Google Scholar
37. Coelho, R, Teixeira, F, Silva, AM, et al. Psychosocial adjustment, psychiatric morbidity and quality of life in adolescents and young adults with congenital heart disease. Rev Port Cardiol 2013; 32: 657664.Google Scholar
38. Moons, P, Van Deyk, K, Marquet, K, et al. Individual quality of life in adults with congenital heart disease: a paradigm shift. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 298307.Google Scholar
39. Thio, AD. Sociology: A Brief Introduction. Pearson Education, Boston, 2008.Google Scholar
40. Chen, CA, Liao, SC, Wang, JK, et al Quality of life in adults with congenital heart disease: biopsychosocial determinants and sex-related differences. Heart 2011; 97: 3843.Google Scholar
41. Van Deyk, K, Moons, P, Marquet, K, et al. Age and gender differences in quality of life and perceived health of adults with congenital heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2004; 3: 113.Google Scholar
42. Wray, J, Sensky, T. How does the intervention of cardiac surgery affect the self-perception of children with congenital heart disease? Child Care Health Dev 1998; 24: 5772.Google Scholar
43. Ben-Zur, H, Rappaport, B, Ammar, R, Uretzky, G. Coping strategies, life style changes, and pessimism after open-heart surgery. Health Soc Work 2000; 25: 201209.Google Scholar
44. Latal, B, Helfricht, S, Fischer, JE, Bauersfeld, U, Landolt, MA. Psychological adjustment and quality of life in children and adolescents following open-heart surgery for congenital heart disease. BMC Pediatr 2009; 9: 110.Google Scholar
45. Moons, P, Van Devk, K, De Geest, S, Gewillig, M, Budts, W. Is the severity of congenital heart disease associated with the quality of life and perceived health of adult patients? Heart 2005; 91: 11931198.Google Scholar
46. Berghammer, M, Dellborg, M, Ekman, I. Young adults experiences of living with congenital heart disease. Int J Cardiol 2006; 110: 340347.Google Scholar
47. Adam, JR, Elwyn, G, Legare, F, Frosh, DL. Communicating with physicians about medical decisions: a reluctance to disagree. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172: 11841186.Google Scholar
48. Hardy, R, Kell, C. Understanding and working with the concept of denial and its role as a coping strategy. Nurs Times 2009; 105: 2224.Google Scholar
49. Green, AR, Carrillo, JE, Betancourt, JR. Why the disease-based model of medicine fails our patients. West J Med 2002; 176: 141143.Google Scholar