Gayenell S Magwood1, Jane Zapka1,2, Carolyn Jenkins1. 1. The College of Nursing, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (GSM, JZ, CJ) 2. The Department of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (JZ)
Abstract
PURPOSE: This article reviews the literature on definitions and issues related to measurement of quality of life in people with diabetes and summarizes reviews of evidence of intervention studies, with a particular focus on interventions targeted for underserved and minority populations. METHODS: An integrative literature review of reviews was conducted on adult diabetes interventions and outcomes. Five electronic databases were searched. Eligible publications were those published between 1999 and 2006 that described outcome measures. Twelve review articles are included. RESULTS: Review studies were heterogeneous in terms of intervention type, content, participants, setting, and outcome measures. Interventions used variable operational definitions and frequently lacked adequate description; therefore, comparisons of findings proved difficult. A clinical outcome, A1C, was the most frequently assessed, with little inclusion of quality-of-life measures. Several reviews and independent studies did not explicitly consider interventions aimed at the underserved. When quality of life was considered, measures and operational definition of domains were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the relationship between interventions and resulting outcomes, particularly quality of life, will require attention to operational definitions and better conceptual models. There is an evidence base emerging about important characteristics of effective intervention programs. This evidence base can guide public health and clinical program planners to better understand and make prudent decisions about assessment, planning, implementation, and evaluation of interventions for people with complex chronic illnesses such as diabetes.
PURPOSE: This article reviews the literature on definitions and issues related to measurement of quality of life in people with diabetes and summarizes reviews of evidence of intervention studies, with a particular focus on interventions targeted for underserved and minority populations. METHODS: An integrative literature review of reviews was conducted on adult diabetes interventions and outcomes. Five electronic databases were searched. Eligible publications were those published between 1999 and 2006 that described outcome measures. Twelve review articles are included. RESULTS: Review studies were heterogeneous in terms of intervention type, content, participants, setting, and outcome measures. Interventions used variable operational definitions and frequently lacked adequate description; therefore, comparisons of findings proved difficult. A clinical outcome, A1C, was the most frequently assessed, with little inclusion of quality-of-life measures. Several reviews and independent studies did not explicitly consider interventions aimed at the underserved. When quality of life was considered, measures and operational definition of domains were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the relationship between interventions and resulting outcomes, particularly quality of life, will require attention to operational definitions and better conceptual models. There is an evidence base emerging about important characteristics of effective intervention programs. This evidence base can guide public health and clinical program planners to better understand and make prudent decisions about assessment, planning, implementation, and evaluation of interventions for people with complex chronic illnesses such as diabetes.
Authors: Susan L Norris; Phyllis J Nichols; Carl J Caspersen; Russell E Glasgow; Michael M Engelgau; Leonard Jack; George Isham; Susan R Snyder; Vilma G Carande-Kulis; Sanford Garfield; Peter Briss; David McCulloch Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Colman Siu Cheung Fung; Carlos King Ho Wong; Edmond Pui Hang Choi; Fang Fang Jiao; Anca Ka Chun Chan; Karina Hiu Yen Chan; Cindy Lo Kuen Lam Journal: Endocrine Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Barry W Rovner; Robin J Casten; Catherine Verrier Piersol; Neva White; Megan Kelley; Benjamin E Leiby Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: J A Black; G H Long; S J Sharp; L Kuznetsov; C E Boothby; S J Griffin; R K Simmons Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Wenying Yang; Xiaoming Zhuang; Yukun Li; Qing Wang; Rongwen Bian; Jianguo Shen; Eva Hammerby; Li Yang Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-11-26 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Maria Donald; Jo Dower; Joseph R Coll; Peter Baker; Bryan Mukandi; Suhail A R Doi Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 3.186