Quality of life following transplantation of the heart, liver, and lungs

The purpose of this study was to describe the quality of life of patients who have received a transplant of the heart, liver, and lungs. We wished to document how the different patient groups fared in relation to each other with respect to physical, psychological, and social functioning, as well as in relation to published normative data. We also wished to identify factors that contribute to better functioning. We sent out a questionnaire by mail and received responses from 55 heart, 149 liver, and 59 lung transplant recipients (82% response rate). Measures included the SF-36, Mental Health Inventory, the State Anxiety Inventory, the UCLA Loneliness Scale-Revised, a quality of life measure that rated degree of improvement since transplantation, a measure of degree of difficulty in following medical and lifestyle regimens, sleep disturbance, and the Illness Intrusiveness Rating Scale. Results indicated that lung transplant patients reported better functioning than heart or liver transplant patients in all three domains of physical, psychological, and social functioning. Lung patients' level of functioning was equivalent to or better than published norms for the SF-36. Heart and liver recipients reported equivalent functioning to published norms in some domains, but reported impairment in the areas of physical and social functioning. Heart patients especially reported greater intrusiveness of their illness on their daily lives and indicated more difficulty complying with their lifestyle regimen. In all three groups, a large majority of patients reported feeling that life had improved since transplant with respect to health, energy level, activity level, and overall quality of life. Fewer patients reported improvements in the areas of sex life, marriage, family relationships, and social relationships. Where there were differences among the three patient groups, again it was the lung patients who reported more improvement in life since transplantation. Patients with better physical functioning tended to have more energy and pep, to be younger, to see themselves as being in better health, to feel less intrusion on their lives of their illness, and to be employed. Those with better psychological functioning tended to report less sleep disturbance, less loneliness, better social functioning, more vitality, and to be older. Better social functioning was associated with better mental health, less illness intrusiveness, and less role impairment as a result of physical or emotional factors. Relatively few patients-roughly a quarter of the total sample-reported that they were working either full or part time. We conclude that transplantation results in improved quality of life overall, but that problems persist for some patients in their physical and social functioning. Interventions aimed at improving rehabilitation in specific targeted areas may enable patients to resume a more fulfilling lifestyle posttransplant.