背景與目的：近年醫療體系越來越重視患者的生活品質，相關研究陸續發展，然而對於自閉症患者生活品質的研究卻仍闕如。加上目前對於自閉症的相關研究較重視孩童的發展，對成人則較少著墨。本研究的目的為調查自閉症成年個案的生活品質之現況，分析比較與健康成年個案的差異，並探討人口學特性、自覺健康狀況、自覺生活快樂的程度與個案生活品質之間的相關性。方法：本研究採橫斷式(cross-sectional) 的實驗設計，研究對象為23 位成年自閉症個案（實驗組）與78 位成年非自閉症個案（對照組），年齡為20-37歲。所使用的評估工具為台灣簡明版世界衛生組織生活品質問卷。結果：結果顯示成年自閉症個案的四個範疇分數由高到低為：環境、生理健康、心理、社會關係。成年自閉症個案在生理健康(11.5 2.1 vs. 12.4 1.6, p < .05)、心理(11.2 3.7 vs. 13.8 2.3, p < .05)、社會關係(9.8 2.9 vs. 13.8 2.1, p < .05) 和環境(12.9 3.1 vs. 14.1 1.7, p < .05) 各個範疇的得分與健康相關生活品質滿意程度總分(45.5 10.2 vs. 54.1 6.3, p < .05)，均顯著低於成年非自閉症族群。進一步分析生活品質與個案特質的相關性，研究顯示年齡、教育程度、性別、月收入皆與生活品質無相關性，此項結果與許多先前的研究不謀而合，而自覺健康狀況(r = .70, p < .001)、自覺健康狀況改變(r = .50, p< .05)、自覺生活快樂的程度(r = .78, p < .001) 則與生活品質成顯著的正向相關。另一方面，成年非自閉症個案的生活品質，其與年齡、教育程度、性別、月收入無相關，而是與自覺健康狀況(r = .44, p < .001)、自覺生活快樂(r =.73, p < .001) 成正相關。結論：本研究結果初步證實成年自閉症個案的生活品質與成年非自閉症個案比較在所有範疇得分有顯著差異。成年自閉症個案的生活品質與其自覺健康狀況、自覺健康狀況改變、自覺生活快樂的程度最相關。未來研究，在成年自閉症的生活品質上，若能有更多成年自閉症族群的樣本數，研究結果會更具代表性；而臨床如何介入成年自閉症族群生活品質的改善是值得深入探討的領域。

Background and Objective: Increasing attention has been paid to studying the outcomes of individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) during adulthood.Subjective perspectives of individuals with ASD on outcomes may lead better interventions. The concept of quality of life (QoL) has increasingly been used in the field of intellectual disabilities over the past three decades. However, only a handful of recent studies have investigated the quality of life of individuals with ASD.This study aimed to examine the quality of life of adults with ASD and its relationships between sample characteristics and self-reported health and mood status. The scores of quality of life among adults with ASD were compared with that of a non-ASD control group. Methods: This research was a cross-sectional study. Twenty-three adults with ASD but without intellectual disability (IQ > 70) and a comparison sample of 78 non-ASD adults completed the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. Their ages ranged from 20 to 37. Independent t-tests and χ² tests were done to examine group differences in demographic data and outcome measures. We calculated Pearson correlation coefficients for the relationships between study variables. Results: The highest QoL was scored in the environment domain, followed by the physical health, and psychological health domains. The lowest QoL score was found in the social relationships domain. The QoL scores of the ASD participants in all domains were significantly lower than in a non-ASD control group, with domains in physical health (11.5 ± 2.1 vs. 12.4 ± 1.6, p < .05), psychological (11.2 ± 3.7 vs. 13.8 ± 2.3, p < .05), social relationships (9.8 ± 2.9 vs. 13.8 ± 2.1, p < .05), environment domain(12.9 ± 3.1 vs. 14.1 ± 1.7, p < .05), and overall QoL (45.5 ± 10.2 vs. 54.1 ± 6.3, p < .05). In addition, it is founded that age, gender, level of education and monthly income were not related to quality of life for adults with ASD. However, subjective satisfaction of health condition (r = .70, p < .001), subjective health condition change (r = .50, p < .05), subjective life happiness (r = .78, p < .001) were positively related to quality of life among adults with ASD. For non-ASD group, subjective satisfaction of health condition (r = .44, p < .001) and subjective life happiness (r = .73, p < .001) were positively related to quality of life. Conclusion: The results of this study provide preliminary evidence that all QoL domains in adults with ASD were lower than in non-ASD control group. Based on our findings, measuring QoL may be useful for clinical care and research of adults with ASD.Social relationships must be considered in designing and applying treatment programs for adults with ASD. Adults with ASD need more supportive environment to promote their quality of life.