Of the instruments we assessed the most promising approaches for measuring the diabetes-specific quality of life are offered by ADDQoL, DCP and WBQ. Patients were involved in the development of these tools which have been shown by a number of studies to have good internal reliability, external and construct validity. Efforts are being continually made worldwide to develop a standard ensuring valid, reliable, easy to use tool for assessing quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in order to promote patients integration into society.

Diabetes Mellitus is a disease that affects almost every aspect of patients' life. Socio-medical importance and continuously increasing financial costs of diabetes require a thorough research on the quality of life in these patients to optimize clinical management and increase the effectiveness of health interventions. The aim of the study is to assess the quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Materials and A cross-sectional study was conducted in 90 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Bulgaria. Health-related quality of life was measured using the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The study result showed that the participants' age ranged from 32 to 88 years old, with mean of 63.0 years (standard deviation (SD) 0.96). Less than half were females (52.9%), married (74.3%) and living in urban areas (61.4%). Diabetes negative impact is observed on all life aspects. The duration of disease (diabetes duration) and diabetes complication seem to be the most influential factors which negatively and statistically significant affect all the SF-36 subscales. It concluded that better quality of life of patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 is achieved by preventing complications and effective management of chronic underlying diseases.

View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Assessment of the impact of type 2 diabetes on the quality of life by Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality-of-Life (ADDQoL-19

The aims of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the UK English Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life version 19 (ADDQOL-19) into Bulgarian and explore the psychometric properties of the ADDQoL-19 BUL. The formalized linguistic procedure was used to develop the Bulgarian version of the ADDQoL-19 BUL. The ADDQoL was assessed for the following: internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)); factor structure and known-groups validity (insulin requiring vs. non-insulin requiring, with vs. without diabetes-related complications, overweight/obese vs. not overweight/obese). A total of 423 adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participated in the study. The mean age was 59.92 years (standard deviation (SD) 11.60, range 28-88 years), and 52.6% were male. Internal consistency (a = 0.922) and the 3-week test-retest stability (intraclass correlation = 0.99) were high. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the one-factor structure of the ADDQoL-19 fits moderately (x 2 = 230.63, df = 136, p < 0.001, SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual) of 0.05, RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) of 0.06, CFI (Comparative Fit Index) of 0.95). Standardized coefficients showed that all domains loaded 0.4, except for one item. The total score was negatively associated with HbA 1 c (r = ¡0.10; p < 0.05), indicating that lower scores were related to poorer glycaemic control. In conclusion, the Bulgarian version of the ADDQoL-19 has good psychometric properties and provides clinicians and researchers with a useful tool for comprehensive assessment of the quality of life in adults with diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and impact of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) on the quality of life of patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A pilot cross-sectional study of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM and T2DM) was conducted. Patients were divided into three groups: group 1 = diabetic neuropathy with pain; group 2 = diabetic neuropathy without pain; group 3 = lack of diabetic neuropathy. The quality of life was assessed by SF-36v2. RESULTS: The prevalence of DPN is 43% among the two groups of patients and higher T2DM (50.8%) compared T1DM (25.6%). DPN with pain was 14% among all subjects with DPN, which was again more often in patients with T2DM (17.9%) than in patients with T1DM (5.8%). Patients in group 1 had statistically significant lower QoL compared to group 2 in all 8 dimensions on SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic neuropathy without and with pain is a common complication for type 2 diabetes mellitus. This condition can be identified with cheap and easy-to-use screening tools. Despite its profound impact on QoL, painful diabetic neuropathy remains under-studied.