General health status in Iranian diabetic patients assessed by short-form-36 questionnaire: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

BackgroundDiabetes mellitus is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. Diabetes is a chronic disease associated with micro- and macro-vascular complications and deterioration in general health status. Therefore, the aim of this study was to estimate general health status among Iranian diabetic patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis of study utilizing the Short-Form-36 questionnaire.MethodsSearching the EMBASE, PubMed, ISI/Web of Sciences (WOS), MEDLINE via Ovid, PsycoINFO, as well as Iranian databases (MagIran, Iranmedex, and SID) from January 2000 to December 2017. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the “A Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool: for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions” (ACROBAT-NRSI). Random-effect model was used and the means were reported with their 95% confidence interval (CI). To evaluate the heterogeneity between studies, I2 test was used. Egger’s regression test was used to assess the publication bias.ResultsFourteen studies were retained in the final analysis. The mean general health status using SF-36 in diabetic patients of Iran was 51.9 (95% CI: 48.64 to 53.54). The mean physical component summary was 52.92 [95% CI: 49.46–56.38], while the mean mental component summary was 51.02 [95% CI: 46.87–55.16].ConclusionThe findings of this study showed that general health status in Iranian diabetic patients is low. Health policymakers should work to improve the health status in these patients and take appropriate interventions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12902-018-0262-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Changes of Endothelin-1 and Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Concentrations in Patients with Cervical Radiculopathy after Wrist-Ankle Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Hot Compression with Chinese Herbal Medicine

“…SF-36 is an instrument for assessment in health status. It has been confirmed that the diabetic patients were with a lower score of SF-36 [ 29 ]. We found that the patients in the study group were with a lower score of NDI and higher score of SF-36 compared to the control group, manifesting neck dysfunction, and quality of life was improved after treatment of wrist-ankle acupuncture-moxibustion and hot compression with Chinese herbal medicine.…”

<p>Psychometric properties of the Persian Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ-P): assessment of type 2 diabetes care supportiveness in Iran</p>

“…Based on the results of previous studies, Iranian patients with type 2 diabetes were not entirely satisfied with the health-care services provided, and suffered from irreversible complications that were partly due to defects in their health care 32,33,44–46. The existence of a standard tool to identify the extent of support provided by HCPs for patients with type 2 diabetes could help these patients and contribute toward the effective implementation and impact evaluation of intervention programs.…”

“…Previous studies indicated that Iranian patients with diabetes generally do not receive the required quality of services. A part of this perceived deficiency may be associated with the health-care provision facilities and the overall perceived performance environment in the health-care centers 32,33…”

Consultation preferences and continuity of care of people with glucose management needs in an online interpersonal support context——a large-scale survey of China’s online health communities

“…The survey instrument comprised several components: demographic information including year of birth, gender, height and weight, educational attainment, employment status, marital status, residency, income, religious a liation, medical history, and exercise frequency; an evaluation of self-perceived health status; an assessment of medication adherence via two selected items from the MMAS-8 [19]; a quality of life scale comprising six chosen items from the SF-36 [20], encapsulating three life quality domains: environmental, physiological, and social relationship; medical consultation preferences and experiences assessed via seven questions, including habits of collating information for consultations, frequency of online health issue consultations, tendencies to make consultation appointments, consultation preferences and the extent to which these preferences are ful lled (adapted from the report by Richard Baker [21]); a query concerning the presence or absence of a familiar physician; and a 5-point continuity of care scale featuring 13 items taken from the Patient Care Continuity Questionnaire (PCCQ) [22], covering three dimensions of continuity: informational (6 items), management (3 items), and relational continuity (4 items).…”

“…2). To facilitate further analyses, the quality of life scores were categorized into high (>24), medium (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24), and low (<19) groups, according to the 25% and 75% quartiles.…”