Suppr超能文献

易受伤害和不易受伤害的老年患者对糖尿病治疗的生活质量影响的认知

Perceptions of quality-of-life effects of treatments for diabetes mellitus in vulnerable and nonvulnerable older patients.

作者信息

Brown Sydney E S, Meltzer David O, Chin Marshall H, Huang Elbert S

机构信息

The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

出版信息

J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Jul;56(7):1183-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01757.x. Epub 2008 May 19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether patient perceptions of treatments for diabetes mellitus differ according to clinical criteria such as limited life expectancy and functional decline (i.e., vulnerability).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Clinics affiliated with two Chicago-area hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 65 and older living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (N=332).

MEASUREMENTS

Utilities (quantitative measures of preference on a scale from 0 to 1, with 0 representing a state equivalent to death and 1 representing life in perfect health) were assessed for nine hypothetical treatment states using time trade-off questions, and patients were queried about specific concerns regarding medications. Vulnerability was defined according to the Vulnerable Elders Scale.

RESULTS

Thirty-six percent of patients were vulnerable. Vulnerable patients were older (77 vs 73) and had diabetes mellitus longer (13 vs 10 years; P<.05). Vulnerable patients reported lower utilities than nonvulnerable patients for most individual treatment states (e.g., intensive glucose control, mean 0.61 vs 0.72, P<.01), but within group variation was large for both groups (e.g., standard deviations >0.25). Although mean individual state utilities differed across groups, no significant differences were found in how vulnerable and nonvulnerable patients compared intensive and conventional treatment states (e.g., intensive vs conventional glucose control). In multivariable analyses, the association between vulnerability and individual treatment state utilities became nonsignificant except for the cholesterol pill.

CONCLUSION

Older patients' preferences for intensity of treatment for diabetes mellitus vary widely and are not closely associated with vulnerability. This observation underscores the importance of involving older patients in decisions about treatment for diabetes mellitus, irrespective of clinical status.

摘要

目的

评估糖尿病患者对治疗的看法是否会根据诸如预期寿命有限和功能衰退(即脆弱性)等临床标准而有所不同。

设计

横断面调查。

地点

芝加哥地区两家医院附属的诊所。

参与者

65岁及以上的2型糖尿病患者(N = 332)。

测量

使用时间权衡问题评估了九种假设治疗状态的效用(从0到1的偏好定量测量,0代表等同于死亡的状态,1代表完全健康的生活),并询问患者对药物的具体担忧。根据脆弱老年人量表定义脆弱性。

结果

36%的患者属于脆弱群体。脆弱患者年龄更大(77岁对73岁),患糖尿病的时间更长(13年对10年;P <.05)。在大多数个体治疗状态下,脆弱患者报告的效用低于非脆弱患者(例如,强化血糖控制,平均值0.61对0.72,P <.01),但两组内的个体差异都很大(例如,标准差>0.25)。尽管各治疗状态下的平均效用在两组间存在差异,但在比较强化和常规治疗状态(例如,强化与常规血糖控制)时,脆弱和非脆弱患者之间未发现显著差异。在多变量分析中,除了胆固醇药物外,脆弱性与个体治疗状态效用之间的关联变得不显著。

结论

老年患者对糖尿病治疗强度的偏好差异很大,且与脆弱性没有密切关联。这一观察结果强调了让老年患者参与糖尿病治疗决策的重要性,无论其临床状况如何。

相似文献

1
Perceptions of quality-of-life effects of treatments for diabetes mellitus in vulnerable and nonvulnerable older patients.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Jul;56(7):1183-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01757.x. Epub 2008 May 19.
2
Patient perceptions of quality of life with diabetes-related complications and treatments.
Diabetes Care. 2007 Oct;30(10):2478-83. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0499. Epub 2007 Jul 10.
6
The impact on utilities of differences in body weight among Canadian patients with type 2 diabetes.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2014 Jul;30(7):1267-73. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2014.899207. Epub 2014 Mar 24.
7
Ethnicity and Diabetic Quality-of-Life.
Am J Med Sci. 2019 Aug;358(2):121-126. doi: 10.1016/j.amjms.2019.04.007. Epub 2019 Apr 19.
8
Using assessing care of vulnerable elders quality indicators to measure quality of hospital care for vulnerable elders.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Nov;55(11):1705-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01444.x.
9
Health state utilities associated with treatment process for oral and injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists for type 2 diabetes.
Qual Life Res. 2021 Jul;30(7):2033-2043. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02808-2. Epub 2021 Apr 22.

引用本文的文献

1
An Overview of Instruments to Assess Vulnerability in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Sep 8;13(17):2251. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13172251.
2
13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025.
Diabetes Care. 2025 Jan 1;48(Supplement_1):S266-S282. doi: 10.2337/dc25-S013.
3
A nurse driven care management program to engage older diabetes patients in personalized goal setting and disease management.
Health Sci Rep. 2024 Jun 23;7(6):e2208. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.2208. eCollection 2024 Jun.
4
13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024.
Diabetes Care. 2024 Jan 1;47(Suppl 1):S244-S257. doi: 10.2337/dc24-S013.
5
Data-driven classification of health status of older adults with diabetes: The diabetes and aging study.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2023 Jul;71(7):2120-2130. doi: 10.1111/jgs.18310. Epub 2023 Mar 8.
7
13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023.
Diabetes Care. 2023 Jan 1;46(Suppl 1):S216-S229. doi: 10.2337/dc23-S013.
8
The individualisation of glycaemic targets in response to patient characteristics in type 2 diabetes: a scoping review.
Clin Med (Lond). 2022 May;22(3):257-265. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2021-0764. Epub 2022 Apr 20.
9
13. Older Adults: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022.
Diabetes Care. 2022 Jan 1;45(Suppl 1):S195-S207. doi: 10.2337/dc22-S013.
10
Methods to Assess Patient Preferences in Old Age Pharmacotherapy - A Systematic Review.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020 Mar 4;14:467-497. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S236964. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

2
Patient perceptions of quality of life with diabetes-related complications and treatments.
Diabetes Care. 2007 Oct;30(10):2478-83. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0499. Epub 2007 Jul 10.
3
Pay for performance at the tipping point.
N Engl J Med. 2007 Feb 1;356(5):515-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe078002. Epub 2007 Jan 26.
4
Standards of medical care in diabetes--2007.
Diabetes Care. 2007 Jan;30 Suppl 1:S4-S41. doi: 10.2337/dc07-S004.
6
Higher vulnerable elders survey scores predict death and functional decline in vulnerable older people.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Mar;54(3):507-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.00615.x.
7
Development and validation of a prognostic index for 4-year mortality in older adults.
JAMA. 2006 Feb 15;295(7):801-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.7.801.
10
Mild cognitive impairment and functional status.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Jan;54(1):163-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.00539.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验