Introduction: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus is one of chronic illnesses that affect patients’ quality of life. The aim of this study was to determine the HRQOL among Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients attending health clinics at Tampin district, Negeri Sembilan. Methodology: A cross-sectional study applying the Malay version SF-36 and structured validated questionnaires among Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients attending five health clinics at district of Tampin, Negeri Sembilan whose were selected using stratified sampling method. Data were analysed using SPSS version 21 of significant level α=0.05. Results: Response rate was 99.5% (430 patients participated).The mean age of the respondents was 57.5 (±8.88) years and the mean duration of having diabetes was 7 (±5.01) years. The mean score of all SF-36 health domains with exception of role emotional of respondents were significantly lower than that of the normal population scoring by Azman.(2003). Physical functioning (P<0.001), role physical (P<0.001), vitality (P<0.001), mental health (P<0.001), social functioning (P<0.001), bodily pain (P<0.001), and general health (P<0.001) were seven domains indicated lower than Malaysian norm. Conclusion: HRQOL of Type 2 Diabetes patients were lower than that of Malaysian general population in all SF-36 domains, with the exception of role emotional domain.

Background: Before an economic evaluation begins, it is important to specify the study perspective which essentially defines the basis of analysis and determines the relevant cost that need to be accounted for. The aim of this paper is to explore the perspectives in an economic evaluation specifically focusing on societal perspectives, on how it affect costs, its application, as well as its advantages and limitations expected in an economic evaluation. Materials and Methods: Literature search was conducted on Google Scholar and PubMed by using keywords such as perspective of economic evaluation, societal perspective, and economic evaluation. Based on the relevant reports, articles and other publications, details on societal perspective in economic evaluation was summarized in the result and discussion section. Result and Discussion: A model demonstrating societal effects that captured by cost-benefit analysis for cancer patient in New South Wales, Australia was used as an example to see the application of societal perspective, where four different scenarios were discussed on how societal impacts of loss of productivity and income affected the patients, employer and their family members. Among the advantages of incorporating societal perspective in economic evaluation studies is that it may result an optimal resource allocation in decision making and also supports an informed public discussion. However it is also prone to disadvantages, such as it may not always be possible to be included in an economic evaluation in certain setting due to funding or time constraints. Conclusion: Societal perspective is recommended option for public health economic evaluation as it take into account all of the perspectives point of view. Health economic evaluation that were conducted from a narrow perspective and only considered direct costs in the analysis is likely to be biased and could significantly undermine the true benefit of the interventions for society. Furthermore, without societal perspective, it may result in suboptimal resource allocation thus incur losses in the total welfare of society.