Skip to main content
Log in

The validity and reliability of the Diabetes Health Profile (DHP) in NIDDM patients referred for insulin therapy

Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, a new diabetes-specific questionnaire, the Diabetes Health Profile (DHP), has been developed to identify psychosocial dysfunctioning of insulin-requiring (NIDDM) and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) patients. The DHP comprises three dimensions: psychological distress (PSY: 14 items), barriers to activity (BAR: 12 items) and disinhibited eating (EAT: five items). This study investigates the psychometric properties of the DHP in Dutch noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) patients referred for insulin therapy. In addition, the relation-ship between patient characteristics and the DHP outcome was examined. The factor structure found was similar but not identical to former studies, but construct validity was supported by high correlations of our factor structure and the original factor outcome and Cronbach's α. The three factors explained 32% of the variance, supporting earlier findings. It was shown that Cronbach's α was satisfactory (0.72, 0.72 and 0.79). Convergent validity showed strong and significant correlations between the PSY/BAR dimensions and predicted corresponding scales of the RAND-36. However, the PSY/BAR dimensions also showed, although less strong, significant correlations with the non-corresponding RAND-36 scales. The EAT dimension showed only correlations with two of the RAND-36 dimensions, thus measuring a different trait. Regression analysis showed that older patients had less problems with items of the EAT dimension and that no difference was found between men and women, supporting earlier findings. The hyperglycaemic complaint ‘fatigue’ gave a significantly lower score (more problems) on the PSY and BAR dimensions. Younger age, the presence of hypertension and retinopathy resulted in a significantly lower score on the EAT dimension. DHP outcome was not significantly influenced by duration of diabetes, HbA1c (indicator of glycemic control), serum total cholesterol, body mass index, chronic diabetes complications and comorbidity. Overall, the psychometric properties were good considering the small and diverse sample, suggesting that the DHP is promising for use in NIDDM patients, although more study is necessary in a larger sample.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. KleinR. Hyperglycemia and microvascular and macrovascular disease in diabetes. Diabetes Care 1995; 18(2): 258–268.

    Google Scholar 

  2. BowlingA. Measuring disease: a review of disease specific quality of life measurement scales. Second edition. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1995: 261–267.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Eng J Med 1993; 329: 977–986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. NerenzR, RepaskyD, WhitehouseF, KahkonenD. Ongoing assessment of health status in patients with diabetes mellitus. Med Care 1992; 30: MS112-MS124.

    Google Scholar 

  5. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) 13. Relative efficacy of randomly allocated diet, sulphonylurea, insulin, or metformin in patients with newly diagnosed non-insulin-dependent diabetes followed for three years. BMJ 1995; 310: 83–88.

    Google Scholar 

  6. CoxDJ, TaylorAG, NowacekG, Holley-WilcoxP, PohlSL, GuthrowE. The relationship between psychosocial stress and insulin-dependent diabetic blood glucose control: preliminary investigations. Health Psychol 1984; 3: 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  7. PeyrotM, McMurryJF. Psychosocial factors in diabetes Med 1985; 47: 542–557.

    Google Scholar 

  8. WilsonW, AryDV, BiglanA, GlasgowRE, TobertDJ, CampbellDR. Psychosocial predictors of self-care behavior (compliance) and glycemic control in non-insulindependent diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 1986; 9: 614–622.

    Google Scholar 

  9. GreenfieldS, KaplanSH, WareJE, YanoEM, FrankHJL. Patients' participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med 1988; 3: 448–457.

    Google Scholar 

  10. MeadowsKA, SteenN, McCollE, EcclesM, HewinsonJ, ShielsC, HutchinsonA. The Diabetes Health Profile (DHP). A new instrument for assessing the psychosocial profile of insulin requiring patients—Development and psychometric evaluation. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 242–254.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Goddijn PPM, Meyboom-de Jong B, VanBallegooie E, Feskens EJM, Bilo HJG. NIDDM patients referred for insulin therapy. Submitted.

  12. VanderZee KI, Sanderman R. Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de RAND-36. Een handleiding. Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken. University of Groningen, 1993.

  13. VanderZeeKI, SandermanR, HeyinkJW. A comparison of two multidimensional measures of health status: the Nottingham Health Profile and the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 165–174.

    Google Scholar 

  14. VanderZee KI, Sanderman R, Heyink JW, DeHaes H. The psychometric qualities of the RAND 36-Item Health Survey: a multidimensional measure of general health status. Int J Behav Med 1995; in press.

  15. BrazierJE, HarperR, JonesNMB, O'CathainA, ThomasKJ, UsherwoodT, WestlakeL. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 1992; 305: 160–164.

    Google Scholar 

  16. WareJ, SherbourneC. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). 1. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473–483.

    Google Scholar 

  17. CronbachLJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297.

    Google Scholar 

  18. JacobsonAM, DeGrootM, SamsonJA. The evaluation of two measures of quality of life in patients with type I and type II diabetes. Diabetes Care 1994; 17: 267–274.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Anonymous. Reliability and validity of a diabetes quality of life measure for the diabetes control and complications trial (DCCT). Diabetes Care 1988; 11: 725–732.

  20. McCollE, SteenN, MeadowsKA, HutchinsonA, EcclesMP, HewisonJ, FowlerP, BladesSM. Developing outcome measures for ambulatory care. Social Science and Medicine 1995; 41(10): 1339–1348.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Goddijn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Goddijn, P., Bilo, H., Meadows, K. et al. The validity and reliability of the Diabetes Health Profile (DHP) in NIDDM patients referred for insulin therapy. Qual Life Res 5, 433–442 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00449918

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00449918

Key words

Navigation