Quality of Life in Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcers


This chapter reviews the research conducted on patients with diabetes and foot ulcers and their health-related quality of life (HRQL). Patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) report a poor HRQL, and physical impairment especially influences the patients’ HRQL.

The instruments used to measure HRQL in patients with DFU vary in number and the characterization of the dimensions they assess. The instruments used are both generic, such as the SF-36, and disease-specific, such as the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale–Short Form (DFS–SF) for patients with DFU, the Cardiff Wound Impact Scale (CWIS) for patients with chronic ulcers in general, and the Neuropathy- and Foot Ulcer-Specific Quality of Life Instrument (NeuroQoL) for patients with foot problems and peripheral neuropathy. Whereas the questions in the generic instruments ask the individual to evaluate her/his physical, social, and mental health in general terms, the disease-specific instruments ask about issues specific to foot problems and foot ulcers. Additional work is needed to further develop and test the validated tools in different countries throughout the world.

A future challenge is the administration of HRQL questionnaires to individual DFU patients in clinical practice, and to use these data, together with other patient-reported outcomes, to improve communication between patients and health-care providers, patient care, and patient well-being.


Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Diabetic Foot Ulcer HRQL Instrument Physical Functioning Subscale Limited Joint Mobility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

List of Abbreviations:


Cardiff Wound Impact Scale


Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale–Short Form


Diabetic foot ulcers


Health-related quality of life


Medical Outcome Study Short-Form Health Survey


Neuropathy- and Foot Ulcer-Specific Quality of Life Instrument


  1. Abbott CA, Carrington AL, et al. (2002). Diabet Med. 19(5): 377–384.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abetz L, Sutton M, et al. (2002). Practical Diabetes Int. 19(6): 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acquadro C, Berzon R, et al. (2003). Value Health. 6(5): 522–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ADA. (1999). Diabetes Care 22(8): 1354–1360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ashford R, McGee P, et al. (2000). Diabetic Foot. 3(4): 150–155.Google Scholar
  6. Bann CM, Fehnel SE, et al. (2003). Pharmacoeconomics. 21(17): 1277–1290.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyko EJ, Ahroni JH, et al. (1996). Diabet Med. 13(11): 967–972.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brod M. (1998). Qual Life Res. 7: 365–372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carrington AL, Mawdsley SK, et al. (1996). Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 32(1–2): 19–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chronbach L. (1951). Psychometria. 16: 297–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davies S, Gibby O, et al. (2000). Qual Life Res. 9: 233–240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans AR, Pinzur MS. (2005). Foot Ankle Int. 26(1): 32–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fairclough DL. (2005). Analysing Longitudinal Studies of QOL. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Fayers P, Machin D. (2001). Quality of Life. Assessment, Ananlysis and Interpretation. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Gibbons GW, Burgess AM, et al. (1995). J CVasc Surg. 21(1): 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodridge D, Trepman E, et al. (2006). Foot Ankle Int. 27(4): 274–280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, et al. (2002). Mayo Clin Proc. 77(4): 371–383.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hays RD, Revicki D. (2005). Reliability and Validity (Including Responsiveness). Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. IDF. (2005). Diabetes and Foot Care: Time to Act. I. D. Federation.Google Scholar
  20. Jeffcoate WJ, Harding KG. (2003). Lancet. 361(9368): 1545–1551.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jeffcoate WJ, Price P, et al. (2004). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 20(Suppl 1): S78–S89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kinmond K, McGee P, et al. (2003). J Tissue Viabil. 13(1): 6–16.Google Scholar
  23. Mayfield JA, Reiber GE, et al. (1998). Diabetes Care. 21(12): 2161–2177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meijer JW, Trip J, et al. (2001). Disabil Rehabil. 23(8): 336–340.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Morrish NJ, Wang SL, et al. (2001). Diabetologia. 44(Suppl 2): S14–S21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nabuurs-Franssen MH, Huijberts MS, et al. (2005). Diabetologia. 48(9): 1906–1910.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Price P, Harding K. (2004). Int Wound J. 1(1): 10–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reiber GE, Lipsky BA, et al. (1998). Am J Surg. 176(2A Suppl): 5S–10S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ribu E. (2007). Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Diabetes and Foot Ulcers. Bergen, Norway, University of Bergen. Dissertation for the degree of philosophiae doctor (PhD).Google Scholar
  30. Ribu L, Hanestad BR, et al. (2007a). Qual Life Res. 16(2): 179–189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ribu L, Hanestad BR, et al. (2007b). J Diabetes Complicat. 21(4): 227–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ribu L, Rustoen T, et al. (2006). J Pain. 7(4): 290–299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ribu L, Birkeland K, et al. (2008). J Diabetes complications 22: 400–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ribu L, Wahl A. (2004). Ostomy Wound Manage. 50(2): 57–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Shaw J, Zimmet P. (1999). Diabetes Rev. 7: 245–252.Google Scholar
  36. Sloan JA, Cella D, et al. (2003). Clin Therap. 25(suppl D): D1–D5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sneeuw KC, Sprangers MA, et al. (2002). J Clin Epidemiol. 55(11): 1130–1143.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spilker B, Revicki D. (1996). Taxonomi of Quality of Life. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  39. Streiner D, Norman G. (1989). Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Tennvall G, Apelqvist J. (2000). J Diabetes Complicat. 14: 235–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Valensi P, Girod I, et al. (2005). Diabetes Metab. 31(3 Pt 1): 263–271.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vallerand AH, Payne JK. (2003). Theories and Conceptual Models to Guide Quality of life Related Research. Jones and Bartlett, Sudbury, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  43. Velikova G, Booth L, et al. (2004). J Clin Oncol. 22: 714–724.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vileikyte L, Peyrot M, et al. (2003). Diabetes Care. 26(9): 2549–2555.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ware JE, Kosinski M, et al. (2005). SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. QualityMetric Inc., Lincoln, RI, 1993, 2000.Google Scholar
  46. Ware JE, Kosinski MA. (2003). SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A Manual for Users of Version 1. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Lincoln, Rode Island.Google Scholar
  47. WHO. (1948). Constitution of the World Health Organization, Basic Documents. World Health Organization. Geneva.Google Scholar
  48. Willrich A, Pinzur M, et al. (2005). Foot Ankle Int. 26(2): 128–134.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Ribu
    • 1
  1. 1.Oslo University CollegeOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations