Patient Perceptions of Quality of Life With Diabetes-Related Complications and Treatments

OBJECTIVE— Understanding how individuals weigh the quality of life associated with complications and treatments is important in assessing the economic value of diabetes care and may provide insight into treatment adherence. We quantify patients’ utilities (a measure of preference) for the full array of diabetes-related complications and treatments. RESEARCH DESIGNANDMETHODS— We conducted interviews with a multiethnic sample of 701 adult patients living with diabetes who were attending Chicago area clinics. We elicited utilities (ratings on a 0–1 scale, where 0 represents death and 1 represents perfect health) for hypothetical health states by using time-tradeoff questions. We evaluated 9 complication states (e.g., diabetic retinopathy and blindness) and 10 treatment states (e.g., intensive glucose control vs. conventional glucose control and comprehensive diabetes care [i.e., intensive control of multiple risk factors]). RESULTS— End-stage complications had lower mean utilities than intermediate complications (e.g., blindness 0.38 [SD 0.35] vs. retinopathy 0.53 [0.36], P 0.01), and end-stage complications had the lowest ratings among all health states. Intensive treatments had lower mean utilities than conventional treatments (e.g., intensive glucose control 0.67 [0.34] vs. conventional glucose control 0.76 [0.31], P 0.01), and the lowest rated treatment state was comprehensive diabetes care (0.64 [0.34]). Patients rated comprehensive treatment states similarly to intermediate complication states. CONCLUSIONS— End-stage complications have the greatest perceived burden on quality of life; however, comprehensive diabetes treatments also have significant negative quality of-life effects. Acknowledging these effects of diabetes care will be important for future economic evaluations of novel drug combination therapies and innovations in drug delivery.

[1]  Philip D. Harvey,et al.  Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38 , 1998, BMJ.

[2]  D. Ronis,et al.  BRIEF REPORT: The burden of diabetes therapy , 2005, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[3]  G. Naglie,et al.  Quality of life of stroke in younger individuals. Utility assessment in patients with arteriovenous malformations. , 1997, Stroke.

[4]  N. Clark,et al.  Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes: Response to Power , 2006 .

[5]  L. Campeau Letter: Grading of angina pectoris. , 1976, Circulation.

[6]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Preference-based measures in economic evaluation in health care. , 2000, Annual review of public health.

[7]  S. Kaplan,et al.  Foot infections in diabetic patients. Decision and cost-effectiveness analyses. , 1995, JAMA.

[8]  Tammy O. Tengs,et al.  One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. , 2000, Medical care.

[9]  B. Gage,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of preference-based antithrombotic therapy for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. , 1998, Stroke.

[10]  G. Brown,et al.  Utilities associated with diabetic retinopathy: results from a Canadian sample , 2003, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  G. Torrance,et al.  Measurement of quality of life in end-stage renal disease: the time trade-off approach. , 1987, Clinical and investigative medicine. Medecine clinique et experimentale.

[12]  M. Engelgau,et al.  Improvements in Diabetes Processes of Care and Intermediate Outcomes: United States, 19882002 , 2006, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  David O Meltzer,et al.  The impact of patient preferences on the cost-effectiveness of intensive glucose control in older patients with new-onset diabetes. , 2006, Diabetes care.

[14]  Anke Richter,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, and serum cholesterol level reduction for type 2 diabetes. , 2002, JAMA.

[15]  R. Steinbrook Facing the diabetes epidemic--mandatory reporting of glycosylated hemoglobin values in New York City. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  R. Holman,et al.  Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. , 1998 .

[17]  Oluf Pedersen,et al.  Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  N J Wald,et al.  A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80% , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[19]  Alastair Gray,et al.  Estimating Utility Values for Health States of Type 2 Diabetic Patients Using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62) , 2002, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[20]  K. Kriegstein,et al.  Inhaled insulin for diabetes mellitus. , 2007 .

[21]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Identifying and Valuing Outcomes , 1996 .

[22]  S. Folstein,et al.  "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. , 1975, Journal of psychiatric research.

[23]  N. Santanello,et al.  HMG CoA reductase inhibitors and quality of life. , 1993, JAMA.

[24]  M. Engelgau,et al.  Valuing health-related quality of life in diabetes. , 2002, Diabetes care.

[25]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.