OBJECTIVES: Approximately 90% of the diabetes population has type 2 diabetes, which has been predicted to become the epidemic of the 21st century.  Treatment satisfaction is not only an important patient-reported outcome (PRO) but also a significant predictor of medication adherence, with implications for the prevention of long-term complications, e.g. retinopathy, neuropathy, nephropathy. The FDA has made recommendations regarding the development and use of PRO measures. Our aim was to identify treatment satisfaction questionnaires for use in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and scrutinize their development history and psychometric properties. METHODS: We used a PICO (population, intervention, competitor and outcome) strategy to search Scopus from 2000 to present for relevant articles. Key search terms included “type 2 diabet*” and “satisfact*”.  Following screening, specific searches for instrument names and citation searches were then conducted. RESULTS: A total of 2154 abstracts were screened.  Four treatment satisfaction instruments were identified as designed for use in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes:  the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ), the Diabetes Medication Satisfaction (Diab-MedSat) questionnaire, the Diabetes Tablet Treatment Questionnaire (DTTQ) and the Satisfaction with Oral Anti-Diabetic Agent Scale (SOADAS). Eleven papers were included in a critical review of the instruments. Development histories and psychometric properties were largely adequate though each instrument was lacking in some aspect. Each instrument has its individual merits; the 8-item DTSQ, 7-item DTTQ and 6-item SOADAS offer brevity, while the 21-item Diab-MedSat offers a more detailed approach. The DTTQ and SOADAS focus specifically on tablet treatment, while the DTSQ and Diab-MedSat enable within-groups comparisons when changing treatment from tablets to insulin. CONCLUSIONS: The DTSQ, the Diab-MedSat, the DTTQ and the SOADAS have acceptable development histories and psychometric properties, though evidence for both could be strengthened in certain areas to fulfil the FDA’s requirements. Given the differing focus/length of each instrument, selection will also depend on study objectives.