Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 6 HRQoL and wellbeing: Effectiveness results and statistical significance for quality of life measures

From: A randomised controlled trial and cost-consequence analysis of traditional and digital foot orthoses supply chains in a National Health Service setting: application to feet at risk of diabetic plantar ulceration

  Traditional Supply Chaina Digital Supply Chainb Digital v Traditional
Point of supply (SD) 6 month (SD) Mean change (SD) Point of supply (SD) 6 month (SD) Mean change (SD) Mean effect at 6 months Independent samples t test
EQ-5D 0.645 (0.728) 0.685 (0.261) 0.040 (0.190) 0.728 (0.239) 0.671 (0.227) −0.057 (0.191) −0.097 t(40) = 1.644, p = 0.108
EQ-VAS 63.91 (23.97) 62.65 (21.13) −1.26 (19.78) 71.05 (18.83) 65.26 (19.33) −5.79 (21.62) −4.529 t(40) = 0.708, p = 0.483
ICECAP-A 0.730 (0.181) 0.693 (0.195) −0.037 (0.105) 0.801 (0.173) 0.829 (0.132) 0.028 (0.107) 0.064 t(38) = −1.908, p = 0.064
  1. aN = 23 for EQ-5D and EQ-VAS, 22 for ICECAP-A, bN = 19 for EQ-5D and EQ-VAS, 18 for ICECAP-A. Due to a lack of statistical significance there is no indication that either intervention was effective at improving HRQoL, health status or capability in this study