Background
Over the past few decades the benefits of assessing Quality of Life (QoL) and mental health in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) have steadily increased with limited studies relating to the most useful method to assess these patients. This study aims to identify, review, summarise, and evaluate the methodological quality for the most validated commonly used health-related QoL and mental health assessment measurements in diabetic patients.
Methods
All original articles published on PubMed, MedLine, OVID, The Cochrane Register, Web of Science Conference Proceedings and Scopus databases were systematically reviewed between 2011 and 2022. A search strategy was developed for each database using all possible combinations of the following keywords: “type 2 diabetes mellitus”, “quality of life”, mental health”, and “questionnaires”. Studies conducted on patients with T2DM of ≥ 18 years with or without other clinical illnesses were included. Articles designed as a literature or systematic review conducted on either children or adolescents, healthy adults and/or with a small sample size were excluded.
Results
A total of 489 articles were identified in all of the electronic medical databases. Of these articles, 40 were shown to meet our eligibility criteria to be included in this systematic review. Approximately, 60% of these studies were cross-sectional, 22.5% were clinical trials, and 17.5% of cohort studies. The top commonly used QoL measurements are the SF-12 identified in 19 studies, the SF-36, included in 16 studies, and the EuroQoL EQ-5D, found in 8 studies. Fifteen (37.5%) studies used only one questionnaire, while the remaining reviewed (62.5%) used more than one questionnaire. Finally, the majority (90%) of studies reported using self-administered questionnaires and only 4 used interviewer mode of administration.
Conclusion
Our evidence highlights that the commonly used questionnaire to evaluate the QoL and mental health is the SF-12 followed by SF-36. Both of these questionnaires are validated, reliable and supported in different languages. Moreover, using single or combined questionnaires as well as the mode of administration depends on the clinical research question and aim of the study.