Article Text

Download PDFPDF

The Patients Preferences Questionnaire for Angina treatment: results and psychometrics from 383 patients in primary care in England
  1. A Bowling1,
  2. B Reeves2,
  3. G Rowe3
  1. 1Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, University College London, London, UK
  2. 2Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
  3. 3Consumer Science, Institute of Food Research, Norwich, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Ann Bowling, Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, University College London, Hampstead Campus, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK; a.bowling{at}


Objectives To develop a psychometrically valid Patient Preferences Questionnaire for Angina treatment (PPQA).

Setting Seven general practices across England in 2007.

Subjects Convenience sample of 383 patients with diagnosed angina.

Method Postal self-administered questionnaire survey using the full-length PPQA. This comprised 54 items about the three main treatment modalities for angina: medication, angioplasty and coronary artery bypass grafting.

Results The full PPQA was reduced to 18 items, six for each of the three subscales (treatment modalities), by standard psychometric methods. The reduced PPQA was psychometrically sound and valid, although confirmatory factor analyses with a larger sample are required.

Conclusion The PPQA is a potentially useful instrument to help clinicians understand patients' angina treatment preferences.

  • Angina
  • patient preferences
  • psychometrics
  • cardiology
  • equity
  • patient choice

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Funding Medical Research Council Health Services Research Collaboration.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.