This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Maddigan, S. L. Articles by Johnson, J. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Maddigan, S. L. Articles by Johnson, J. A. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Diabetes Rural Health Concerns Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of the Health Utilities Indices Mark 2 and Mark 3 in Type 2 Diabetes

David H. Feeny, PhD

Jeffrey A. Johnson, PhD

Institute of Health Economics #1200-10405 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton, AB T5J3N4, Canada; telephone: (780) 448-4881; fax: (780) 448-0018; jeff.johnson{at}ualberta.ca

Purpose. Past research into health-related quality of life (HRQL) in diabetes using preference-based measures, such as the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) or the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), is sparse. Important differences between the HUI2 and HUI3 could lead to differences in their abilities to capture HRQL deficits in type 2 diabetes. This analysis compared the extent to which the HUI2 and HUI3 detect differences associated with varying levels of disease severity or advancement in type 2 diabetes. Methods. This analysis was conducted as part of using baseline, crosssectional data from a larger, prospective, controlled study of an intervention to improve care for individualswith type 2 diabetes in ruralcommunities in Alberta, Canada. The HUI2 and HUI3were self-administered to 372 community-dwelling individuals with type 2 diabetes. Results. Relative to HUI2 scores, larger differences in overall HUI3 scores were seen forcomparisons for individuals presumed to have more advanced disease. The pain attribute of the HUI3 categorized a larger proportion of individuals as moderately to severely impaired (41.5% v. 24.2%,P < 0.001), as did the emotion attribute (20.5% v. 7.7%,P < 0.001). For individuals with negative overall HUI3 scores, differences between overall HUI2 and HUI3 scores persisted after rescaling (mean difference = 0.33,P = 0.009). Conclusions. The greater range of possibl e scores on the HUI3, its relative ability to assess the utility of states worse than dead, and its relative superiority in discriminating moderate to severe impairment from mild or no impairment might favor its use over the HUI2 in type 2 diabetes.

Key Words: type 2 diabetes • Health Utilities Index • health-related quality of life • preference-based measures

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 23, No. 6, 489-501 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X03258438


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. L. Maddigan, D. H. Feeny, S. R. Majumdar, K. B. Farris, and J. A. Johnson Understanding the Determinants of Health for People With Type 2 Diabetes Am J Public Health, September 1, 2006; 96(9): 1649 - 1655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]