OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether self-rated health profiles compiled using the EuroQol group's visual analog scale (EQ VAS) are independent predictors of vascular events and major complications in people with type 2 diabetes after controlling for standard clinical risk factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study is based on 7,348 individuals with a mean follow-up of 2.4 years after completing the EQ-5D questionnaire. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate hazard ratios associated with EQ VAS scores after controlling for baseline covariates: age, sex, smoking status, diabetes duration, A1C, systolic blood pressure, BMI, plasma lipids, and prior clinical history. RESULTS: A 10-point higher EQ VAS score was associated with a 6% (95% CI 1-11) lower risk of vascular events and a 22% (95% CI 15-28) lower risk of diabetes complications. CONCLUSIONS: Self-rated health profiles compiled using the EQ VAS provide valuable information on patient risk in addition to that determined from clinical risk factors alone.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether self-rated health profiles compiled using the EuroQol group's visual analog scale (EQ VAS) are independent predictors of vascular events and major complications in people with type 2 diabetes after controlling for standard clinical risk factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study is based on 7,348 individuals with a mean follow-up of 2.4 years after completing the EQ-5D questionnaire. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate hazard ratios associated with EQ VAS scores after controlling for baseline covariates: age, sex, smoking status, diabetes duration, A1C, systolic blood pressure, BMI, plasma lipids, and prior clinical history. RESULTS: A 10-point higher EQ VAS score was associated with a 6% (95% CI 1-11) lower risk of vascular events and a 22% (95% CI 15-28) lower risk of diabetes complications. CONCLUSIONS: Self-rated health profiles compiled using the EQ VAS provide valuable information on patient risk in addition to that determined from clinical risk factors alone.
Authors: Tanzila Shams; Alexander P Auchus; Suzanne Oparil; Clinton B Wright; Jackson Wright; Anthony J Furlan; Cathy A Sila; Barry R Davis; Sara Pressel; Jose-Miguel Yamal; Paula T Einhorn; Alan J Lerner Journal: Stroke Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Anni B S Nielsen; Dorte Gannik; Volkert Siersma; Niels de Fine Olivarius Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2011-06-27 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Niels de Fine Olivarius; Volkert Siersma; Anni Bs Nielsen; Lars J Hansen; Lotte Rosenvinge; Carl Erik Mogensen Journal: BMC Endocr Disord Date: 2010-08-10 Impact factor: 2.763
Authors: Laura N McEwen; Catherine Kim; Mary N Haan; Debashis Ghosh; Paula M Lantz; Theodore J Thompson; William H Herman Journal: Prim Care Diabetes Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Wendy L Bennett; Pamela Ouyang; Albert W Wu; Bethany B Barone; Kerry J Stewart Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2008-12-04 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: C J Hoogendoorn; J S Gonzalez; C B Schechter; A Flattau; N D Reeves; A J M Boulton; L Vileikyte Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 4.359