Endocrine Abstracts (2004) 7 P150

Quality of life deficit in hypopituitary adults with growth hormone deficiency (GHD): comparison of age-sex matched patient data and a UK population survey

M Koltowska-Häggström1, JP Monson3, S Hennessy2, A Mattsson1 & P Kind2


1KIGS/KIMS Outcomes Research, Pharmacia AB, Stockholm, Sweden; 2Outcomes Research Group, Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK; 3Department of Endocrinology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.


Background: Although the negative impact of GHD in adults on quality of life (QoL) is well recognized and it has become routinely measured in clinical practice, there is still limited information about the extent of the differential between adults with GHD and their age/sex-matched peers within the general population.

Objectives: The study was designed to test the discriminatory power of QoL-AGHDA by determining normative reference values in the general population and demonstrating the QoL deficit in GHD patients.

Methods: QoL-AGHDA comprises a 25-item questionnaire that elicits yes/no responses (coded to 1/0) and used to compute an aggregate summary index. A high QoL-AGHDA score denotes poor QoL. The population sample consisted of 1,200 individuals randomly selected from the national UK Population Preference Panel. Completed survey forms were received from 882 individuals (57% female, median age 55, range 18 to 90). The age/sex matched population data were compared with data generated by patients in the UK KIMS (Pfizer's international metabolic database).

Results: Mean QoL-AGHDA scores in the general population were in males and females 6.37 plus/minus 5.60 (n=377) and 7.10 plus/minus 6.03 (n=491) and in patients 13.61 plus/minus 6.58 (n=505) and 15.44 plus/minus 6.34, (n=527) (mean plus/minus SD) respectively. The differences in the age- and gender-specific means for the general population and patients with GHD were statistically significant (p<0.0001 in most instances) indicating the differential impact of GHD on the latter group. Additionally the mean QoL-AGHDA score for different categories of self-assessed health-status (excellent/very good/good/fair/poor) increased progressively as self-assessed health status fell.

Conclusions: This study reports for the first time on the use of QoL-AGHDA in a UK general population setting. It provides important evidence on the performance of this condition-sensitive measure as well as calibrating normative reference values. Additionally it confirmed the discriminant validity of the measure and demonstrated the different health status of patients with GHD

Article tools

My recent searches

No recent searches.