Which health-related quality of life score? A comparison of alternative utility measures in patients with Type 2 diabetes in the ADVANCE trial
2007

Comparing Quality of Life Measures in Type 2 Diabetes Patients

Sample size: 978 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Paul Glasziou, Jan Alexander, Elaine Beller, Philip Clarke

Primary Institution: Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, Institute of Health Sciences, Oxford University

Hypothesis

The study aimed to measure the impact of diabetes on various health-related quality of life domains and compare several summary utility measures.

Conclusion

The summary utility measures showed good agreement and discrimination between major and minor health state changes, with EQ-5D based measures performing as well as SF-36 based methods.

Supporting Evidence

  • The mean utility ranged from 0.68 to 0.85 across the nine utility measures.
  • Summary indices were well correlated with each other (r = 0.76 to 0.99).
  • Patients with major diabetes-related events showed lower health-related quality of life.

Takeaway

This study looked at how diabetes affects people's quality of life and found that different ways of measuring this impact can give similar results.

Methodology

Patients completed two health-related quality of life questionnaires (EQ-5D and SF-36v2) at baseline, and nine summary utility measures were calculated and compared.

Potential Biases

The study did not account for multiple morbidities within individual patients, which could affect the results.

Limitations

The study was limited to Australian patients with diabetes in a clinical trial, which may not be representative of the general population.

Participant Demographics

The cohort was 71% male, with a mean age of 67 years and a mean duration of diabetes of 7.2 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

<0.001

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1477-7525-5-21

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication