Diabetes-specific emotional distress in people with Type 2 diabetes: a comparison between primary and secondary care

Cross-sectional associations of self-perceived stress and hair cortisol with metabolic outcomes and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes

Introduction

Increasing evidence supports chronic psychological stress as a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes. Much less is known, however, about the role of chronic stress in established diabetes.

Methods

The aim of the current study was to comprehensively assess chronic stress in a sample of 73 patients with type 2 diabetes and 48 non-diabetic control participants, and to investigate associations with indicators of glycemic control (HbA1c), insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), β-cell functioning (C-peptide), illness duration, and the presence of microvascular complications. Chronic stress was measured using questionnaires [the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), the Screening Scale of the Trier Inventory of Chronic Stress (SSCS), the Perceived Health Questionnaire (PHQ) as well as the Questionnaire on Stress in Patients with Diabetes-Revised (QSD-R)]; hair cortisol was used as a biological indicator.

Results

We found that patients with type 2 diabetes had higher levels of hair cortisol in comparison to the control group (F(1,112) = 5.3; p = 0.023). Within the diabetic group, higher hair cortisol was associated with a longer duration of the illness (r = 0.25, p = 0.04). General perceived stress did not show significant associations with metabolic outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients. In contrast, higher diabetes-related distress, as measured with the QSD-R, was associated with lower glycemic control (r = 0.28, p = 0.02), higher insulin resistance (r = 0.26, p = 0.03) and a longer duration of the illness (r = 0.30, p = 0.01).

Discussion

Our results corroborate the importance of chronic psychological stress in type 2 diabetes. It appears, however, that once type 2 diabetes has developed, diabetes-specific distress gains in importance over general subjective stress. On a biological level, increased cortisol production could be linked to the course of the illness.

Prevalence and factors associated with diabetes-related distress in type 2 diabetes patients: a study in Hong Kong primary care setting

Diabetes-related distress (DRD) refers to the psychological distress specific to living with diabetes. DRD can lead to negative clinical consequences such as poor self-management. By knowing the local prevalence and severity of DRD, primary care teams can improve the DRD evaluation in our daily practice. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in 3 General Out-patient Clinics (GOPCs) from 1 December 2021 to 31 May 2022. A random sample of adult Chinese subjects with T2DM, who regularly followed up in the selected clinic in the past 12 months, were included. DRD was measured by the validated 15-item Chinese version of the Diabetes Distress Scale (CDDS-15). An overall mean score ≥ 2.0 was considered clinically significant. The association of DRD with selected clinical and personal factors was investigated. The study recruited 362 subjects (mean age 64.2 years old, S.D. 9.5) with a variable duration of living with T2DM (median duration 7.0 years, IQR 10.0). The response rate was 90.6%. The median HbA1c was 6.9% (IQR 0.9). More than half (59.4%) of the subjects reported a clinically significant DRD. Younger subjects were more likely to have DRD (odds ratio of 0.965, 95% CI 0.937-0.994, p = 0.017). Patients with T2DM in GOPCs commonly experience clinically significant DRD, particularly in the younger age group. The primary care clinicians could consider integrating the evaluation of DRD as a part of comprehensive diabetes care.

Diabetes-related distress and quality of life among people with type 2 diabetes at primary care level in Brazil

PURPOSE

Living with diabetes can be challenging, particularly when it comes to dealing with psychological distress and requiring self-care directives. Patients may feel frustrated, angry, overwhelmed, and discouraged. This study aimed to investigate the diabetes-related distress and quality of life among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study carried out at the Clinical Research Centre at the University of Campinas, Brazil, between September 2020 and April 2021. Patients answered data regarding demographic and clinical variables, the Brazilian version of the Diabetes Distress Scale and the Diabetes Quality of Life (QOL) Measure by telephone contact. The data were managed using the RedCap System. For statistical analysis of the data, the Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were applied for comparisons, and the Chi-square test for associations. The correlations were evaluated using the Spearman correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Out of the 302 participants we recruited, 50.33% exhibited significant diabetes-related distress. Those with elevated diabetes-related distress scores had shorter education levels (p < 0.05), lower HbA1c levels (p < 0.05), and lower total scores in Diabetes QOL Measure (p < 0.0001), particularly in the QOL impact (p < 0.0001), social/vocational worry (p < 0.05), and diabetes worry (p < 0.0001) subscales compared to the group with the lowest diabetes-related distress.

CONCLUSION

Elevated diabetes-related stress scores significantly affect patients' QOL. Therefore, early screening of individuals at risk for this condition, using well-coordinated protocols, could mitigate adverse QOL effects and enhance their overall experience during disease management.

The prevalence of diabetes distress among patients with type 2 diabetes in Jordan

Objectives

Diabetes distress (DD) is a state of emotional distress that evolves from living with chronic disease and the burden of daily adjustments of medications and lifestyle. This study investigated the prevalence of DD in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Jordan and the related sociodemographic and medical factors.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study in 608 patients with T2DM in Jordan, ranging from ages 15 to 80 years. The participants filled out a questionnaire where they were asked to self-assess their DD using the Diabetes Distress Scale. In all, 32 participants were excluded according to the exclusion criteria, which resulted in 576 people being included in this study.

Results

The overall prevalence of DD was 53% (25% had moderate distress and 28% had high distress). Emotional distress had the highest prevalence among the DD subscales, with a total prevalence of 58.8%. The data showed a significant association of DD with different factors including age, the presence of diabetic complications, the type of medication used, and medication adherence.

Conclusion

This study showed a high prevalence of DD (53%). This finding should raise awareness to healthcare providers about the importance of screening for DD as part of the treatment guidelines, especially in patients who are on multiple medication regimens for DM; patients who have previous medical complications related to DM; and those who exhibit poor adherence to medications, which was found to be a risk factor of DD in this study.

Well-being outcomes of a family-focused intervention for persons with type 2 diabetes and support persons: Main, mediated, and subgroup effects from the FAMS 2.0 RCT

AIMS

Type 2 diabetes self-management occurs within social contexts. We sought to test the effects of Family/friend Activation to Motivate Self-care (FAMS), a self-care support intervention delivered via mobile phones, on psychosocial outcomes for persons with diabetes (PWDs) and their support persons.

METHODS

PWDs had the option to enroll with a friend/family member as a support person in a 15-month RCT to evaluate FAMS versus enhanced usual care. FAMS included 9 months of monthly phone coaching and text message support for PWDs, and text message support for enrolled support persons.

RESULTS

PWDs (N = 329) were 52% male and 39% reported minoritized race or ethnicity ; 50% enrolled with elevated diabetes distress. Support persons (N = 294) were 26% male and 33% reported minoritized race or ethnicity. FAMS improved PWDs' diabetes distress (d = -0.19) and global well-being (d = 0.21) during the intervention, with patterns of larger effects among minoritized groups. Post-intervention (9-month) and sustained (15-month) improvements were driven by changes in PWDs' self-efficacy, self-care behaviors, and autonomy support. Among support persons, FAMS improved helpful involvement without increasing burden or harmful involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

FAMS improved PWDs' psychosocial well-being, with post-intervention and sustained improvements driven by improved self-efficacy, self-care, and autonomy support. Support persons increased helpful involvement without adverse effects.

Well-being outcomes of a family-focused intervention for persons with type 2 diabetes and support persons: Main, mediated, and subgroup effects from the FAMS 2.0 RCT

Aims

Type 2 diabetes self-management occurs within social contexts. We sought to test the effects of Family/friends Activation to Motivate Self-care (FAMS), a self-care support intervention delivered via mobile phones, on psychosocial outcomes for persons with diabetes (PWDs) and their support persons.

Methods

PWDs had the option to enroll with a friend/family member as a support person in a 15-month RCT to evaluate FAMS versus enhanced usual care. FAMS included 9-months of monthly phone coaching and text message support for PWDs, and text message support for enrolled support persons.

Results

PWDs (N=329) were 52% male and 39% from minoritized racial or ethnic groups; 50% enrolled with elevated diabetes distress. Support persons (N=294) were 26% male and 33% minoritized racial or ethnic groups. FAMS improved PWDs' diabetes distress ( d =-0.19) and global well-being ( d =0.21) during the intervention, with patterns of larger effects among minoritized groups. Post-intervention and sustained (15-month) improvements were driven by changes in PWDs' self-efficacy, self-care behaviors, and autonomy support. Among support persons, FAMS improved helpful involvement without increasing burden or harmful involvement.

Conclusions

FAMS improved PWDs' psychosocial well-being, with post-intervention and sustained improvements driven by improved self-efficacy, self-care, and autonomy support. Support persons increased helpful involvement without adverse effects.

Factors associated with diabetes-related distress among Asian patients with poorly controlled type-2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study in primary care

BACKGROUND

Diabetes-related distress (DRD) is a negative emotional state related to the burden of living with diabetes mellitus. It has been associated with poor self-care and glycaemic control. This cross-sectional study aimed to examine the factors associated with DRD among urban Asian patients with poorly controlled type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in primary care in Singapore. The factors included demographics, diabetes history, medical co-morbidities, mood disorders and social history.

METHODS

Patients with T2DM and HbA1c of 8% or more were recruited from 2 public primary care centres in Singapore. They were administered a questionnaire survey to identify DRD based on the Problem Area In Diabetes (PAID) scale. Their anxiety and depression were screened using GAD-7 and PHQ-9, and quality of life (QOL) measured using the EQ-5D-5L. Their clinical data, including HbA1c, comorbidities and medications, were extracted from the electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Among the 356 subjects, the prevalence of DRD was 17.4%. DRD was significantly associated with younger age (AOR (95% CI) = 0.93 (0.89-0.97), p = 0.001), ex-smoker status (AOR (95% CI) = 22.30 (2.43-204.71), p = 0.006) and history of kidney disease (AOR (95% CI) = 3.41 (1.39-8.35), p = 0.007). Those who screened positive for depression (AOR (95% CI) = 4.98 (1.19-20.86), p = 0.028) were almost five times more likely to have DRD. Quality of life was lower among those with DRD (EQ5D index score AOR (95% CI) = 0.11 (0.01-0.97), p = 0.047), who also tended to feel that diabetes pharmacotherapy interfered with their normal life (AOR (95% CI) = 2.89 (1.38-6.08), p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

About 1 in 6 patients with poorly controlled T2DM had DRD. Younger age, ex-smoker status, history of kidney disease, and those with depressive symptoms were most at risk.

Exploring the Needs of Adults Living With Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Distress Using the Problem Areas in Diabetes 5 Tool

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a screening tool as a part of routine care and the subsequent screening experiences of patients and clinicians. Additionally, potential sources of diabetes distress (DD) were identified in this clinical population.

METHODS

Our investigation was a cross-sectional, mixed-methods, convenience sample of 203 patients living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes from 2 Canadian tertiary hospital-based clinics. The Problem Areas in Diabetes 5 (PAID5) scale was used to assess DD. Structured telephone interviews of patients with high DD scores and care provider focus group transcriptions were analyzed using a deductive thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

The prevalence of DD was 45%. Lack of medication coverage (p=0.02) and presence of neuropathy (p=0.04) were approximately 5- and 2-fold more likely to be predictors of high DD, respectively. Patient interviews identified DD screening as an opportunity to share and feel supported but demonstrated their fear of discussing mental health concerns. Patients found discussion about mental health helpful and often did not require a referral to a mental health specialist. Staff focus groups discussed screening as a feasible tool, but also acknowledged barriers and knowledge gaps that preclude DD screening integration in routine clinical practice. Specialized training for clinicians may help increase confidence and improve uptake of DD screening into routine clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of DD in outpatient care settings is high. Findings suggest that integrating the PAID5 screening tool into regular clinical practice is feasible by patients and care providers.

The socio-demographic and lifestyle characteristics associated with quality of life among diabetic patients in Lebanon: a cross-sectional study

Objective

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic non-communicable endocrine disease that has a considerable impact on both the health and quality of life (QoL) of patients. This study aimed to investigate the sociodemographic factors associated with the quality of life among the Lebanese population with DM.

Methods

A cross-sectional study that enrolled 125 diabetic patients aged ≥18, was conducted between January and June of 2021. The validated Arabic version of the Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL) questionnaire is utilized by all patients to measure the quality of life (QoL). A logistic regression was then performed.

Results

The life domains "freedom to eat" and "freedom to drink", were the most negatively impacted by diabetes. According to the multivariate analysis monthly income OR 3.4, 95 % CIs 1.25 -9.6, P = 0.017, educational level (OR) 0.2, 95 % CIs 0.07 -0.89, HbA1c (OR) 7, 95 % CIs 1.5 -32.35, and FBG [odds ratio (OR) 1.01, 95 % (CIs) 1.004 -1.021, P = 0.005] were independently associated with impaired QOL.

Conclusion

The study showed that diabetes generally had a negative impact on QoL. The findings also suggest that certain sociodemographic factors, such as monthly income and educational level along with clinical parameters like HbA1c, might be associated with a lower quality of life among Lebanese diabetic patients.

Diabetes-related distress and associated factors among adults with diabetes in Germany: Results of the nationwide study "Disease knowledge and information needs - Diabetes mellitus 2017"

BACKGROUND

Diabetes-related distress (DRD) can affect diabetes management adversely. In lack of population-based data, the frequency and determinants of DRD among adults with diabetes in Germany remain controversial.

METHODS

This study included 1367 adults with diabetes who participated in a nationwide health telephone survey conducted among German adults aged 18 years and older in 2017. The short form of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-5) scale was used to assess DRD. The associations of high DRD (PAID-5 sum score ≥ 8) with socio-demographics, diabetes-related risk factors, diabetes clinical characteristics as well as quality of self-care and chronic illness care assessed by patients were tested in multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The overall DRD prevalence was 15.1% (95% confidence intervals, 95% CIs, 12.5-18.0%) with no significant difference between men (14.7%, 95% CIs 11.2-19.1%) and women (15.4%, 11.9-19.8%). In multivariable analyses, DRD was significantly associated with younger age (odds ratio 0.96, 95% CIs 0.94-0.98, per year), immigration background (2.26, 1.16-4.42), current smoking (2.06, 1.14-3.70), insulin use (2.57, 1.45-4.56), and the presence of diabetes-specific complications (1.80, 1.10-2.94) or depressive symptoms (5.34, 3.24-8.81). Among those with depressive symptoms (18,4% of the study population), 38.3% also had DRD, which accounted for 7.0% (95% CIs 5.3-9.3%) of the study population.

CONCLUSION

DRD is a common health problem among adults with diabetes in Germany, and highly correlates with depressive symptoms, current smoking, immigration background, and insulin use. Addressing DRD needs to become an integrative part of ambulatory diabetes care.

Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the 5-item Problem Areas in Diabetes (AR-PAID-5) scale

Background

Screening for diabetes distress is recommended when caring for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in primary healthcare (PHC). The 5-item Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-5) scale is widely used to measure diabetes distress, but its Arabic validation studies are scarce, so this study was carried to assess the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the PAID-5 (AR-PAID-5) in Egyptian PHC patients with T2DM.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study including 260 participants from six rural PHC settings in Ismailia governorate, Egypt. Internal consistency using Cronbach’s α and one-month test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were investigated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate the one-factor structure of the AR-PAID-5. Correlations of the AR-PAID-5 with the Arabic versions of the 20-item Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID), Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7), 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) scales and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were investigated for supporting the convergent validity. Associations of the PAID-5 with sociodemographic, and clinical characteristics were assessed for demonstrating the discriminant validity. Criterion validity was also evaluated.

Results

There was a good internal consistency (α = 0.88) and a stable test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.74). The CFA confirmed the one-factor structure of the AR-PAID-5. Significant positive correlations existed between the AR-PAID-5 with diabetes distress evaluated by the Arabic version of the PAID (rho = 0.93, p < 0.001), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) (rho = 0.56, p < 0.001), anxiety symptoms (GAD-7) (rho = 0.47, p < 0.001), emotional well-being (WHO-5) (rho = − 0.38, p < 0.001), and HbA1c (rho = 0.16, p = 0.003). A satisfactory discriminant validity, and an acceptable criterion validity were demonstrated.

Conclusions

The AR-PAID-5 scale is a reliable and valid tool that can be used for diabetes distress screening and in research in Arabic speaking PHC patients with T2DM.

Reduktion von diabetesbezogenem Distress bei Typ-1- und Typ-2-Diabetes durch eine kognitiv-verhaltenstherapeutische Gruppenintervention

Das Stresserleben durch die Erkrankung Diabetes mellitus stellt für einen Großteil der betroffenen Personen oft eine deutliche Belastung dar, die sich negativ auf das Diabetes-Selbstmanagement und damit auf die Gesundheit der Betroffenen auswirken kann. Das Ziel der vorliegenden Studie war die Evaluation einer diabetesspezifischen kognitiv-verhaltenstherapeutischen Gruppentherapie zur Reduktion des Stresserlebens, bestehend aus sechs Sitzungen für Personen mit Typ-1- oder Typ-2-Diabetes. Vermittelt wurden Techniken zur Stressbewältigung, wie Achtsamkeit und Entspannungsübungen, sowie kognitive Techniken, die auf den Alltag mit der Diabeteserkrankung und damit verbundene Gedanken und Emotionen der Teilnehmenden bezogen waren. Von 52 Personen (51,9% mit Typ-1-Diabetes, 61,5% weiblich, Alter MW= 50,4 Jahre) lagen nach Studienteilnahme Fragebögen vor. Eine signifikante Verbesserung konnte im Problem Areas In Diabetes Questionnaire (Δ6.24 [95%-KI: 1.85–10.62], p=.006), dem Perceived Stress Survey (Δ2.93 [95%-KI: 1.59–4.26], p=.000) und der Diabetes Acceptance Scale (Δ5.5 [95%-KI: 9.07–1.93], p=.003) erreicht werden. Diese erwies sich auch im Follow-Up nach sechs Monaten als stabil. Der selbstberichtete HbA1c-Wert reduzierte sich im Befragungszeitraum bei der Teilstichprobe von N= 40, von der die Daten verfügbar waren, ebenfalls signifikant (Δ0.73 [95%-KI: 0.015–1.452], p=.046). Das Gruppentherapieprogramm zur Stressreduktion kann als eine niedrigschwellige, psychotherapeutische Interventionen zur Reduktion diabetesbezogener Belastungen angesehen werden. Es könnte ein hilfreiches primär- und sekundärpräventives Angebot für stressbelastete Menschen mit Diabetes in der Standardversorgung darstellen.

Social Determinants of Health and Diabetes-Related Distress in Patients with Insulin-Dependent Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional, Mixed Methods Approach (Preprint)

Background

Social determinants of health (SDOH) refer to the social, economic, and psychosocial conditions that influence health. Lower levels of SDOH factors including income, education, and employment are associated with a higher prevalence of diabetes, poorer glycemic control, and increased diabetes-related mortality. Few studies have conducted a comprehensive evaluation of multiple SDOH factors in a population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Objective

This study aimed to identify the range of SDOH challenges—including diabetes-related distress—that impact patients with insulin-dependent diabetes at an urban safety-net clinic using the 5-domain SDOH framework developed by the Healthy People 2020 initiative.

Methods

The pilot study used a cross-sectional, mixed methods approach. Participants were recruited from 3 programs within a general internal medicine clinic that provides ambulatory care for patients with uncontrolled T2DM. We administered an investigator-developed SDOH survey based on the Healthy People 2020 framework and the validated Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), which assesses 4 domains of diabetes-related distress. One-on-one interviews were conducted to gain in-depth information about challenges.

Results

In total, 57 participants had an average hemoglobin A_1c level of 11.0% (SD 2.6%). Overall, 92% (52/57) of participants had a barrier in at least one SDOH domain. SDOH challenges were most commonly reported in the domain of Health and Health Care (84%, 48/57), followed by Economic Stability (54%, n=31), Neighborhood and Built Environment (53%, n=30), Education and Health Literacy (47%, n=27), and Social and Community context (37%, n=21). The mean overall DDS score was 2.09 (SD 0.84), where scores of ≥2 indicate distress. Further, 79% (45/57) of participants had at least moderate diabetes-related distress in one of the 4 DDS domains. General themes that emerged from participant interviews included job interference with healthy behaviors, concerns about burdening others, challenges communicating with providers, and difficulty getting appointments in a timely manner.

Conclusions

We found high levels of SDOH barriers across all 5 domains of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Healthy People 2020 framework, including significant levels of diabetes-related distress. Future programs to address SDOH barriers in patients with uncontrolled insulin-dependent diabetes should consider screening for and focusing on a wide range of challenges.

How to identify clinically significant diabetes distress using the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale in adults with diabetes treated in primary or secondary care? Evidence for new cut points based on latent class analyses

INTRODUCTION

The Problem Areas of Diabetes (PAID) questionnaire is a frequently used measure to assess diabetes-distress. The aim of this study was to identify clinically meaningful levels of diabetes-distress, using latent class analyses (LCA), and to determine which groups were at increased risk of elevated diabetes-distress in terms of sex, age, type of diabetes and glycaemic control.

METHODS

Data were derived from four studies (total N=2966, 49% female, age range 18-95 years, 43% type 1 diabetes, diabetes duration range 0-79 years). LCAs were performed to examine possible latent groups in the distribution of answers on the individual PAID items. Demographic and diabetes-related characteristics were added to the model to estimate their effects on latent class membership and receiver operating curves curves to determine cut-offs.

RESULTS

Three levels of diabetes distress were distinguished with defined cut-off scores and labelled as: low, moderate and high diabetes distress. Levels of distress did not associate with distinct clusters of items. Older people were more likely to be part of the low distress class; women and people with high HbA_1c were more likely to be part of the high distress class. Sensitivity and specificity of the commonly used cut-off of 40 for high distress are 0.95 and 0.97, respectively. To distinguish the moderate distress group, cut-off scores of 17 and 39 are optimal with a sensitivity of 0.93 and a specificity of 0.94.

CONCLUSION

Three levels of diabetes-distress can be distinguished: low, moderate and high diabetes distress. Younger people, women and people with poor glycaemic control are at an increased risk for high levels of distress. A cut-off of 40 is satisfactory to detect people with high levels of diabetes-distress; a score of 0-16 indicates low diabetes distress and a score of 17-39 moderate diabetes distress.

Prevalence and Associated Factors of Diabetes Distress, Depression and Anxiety Among Primary Care Patients With Type 2 Diabetes During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Egypt: A Cross-Sectional Study

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is growing worldwide. T2DM is often complicated by a range of psychological disorders that interfere with glycemic control and self-care. Previous studies have reported diabetes distress, depression, and anxiety among patients with T2DM; however; little is known about the burden of these comorbid mental disorders in primary care patients with T2DM treated in Egypt during the COVID-19 era. Participants were selected by convenient sampling from eight rural primary healthcare facilities from Ismailia in Egypt. Symptoms of diabetes distress, depression and anxiety were assessed by using the Arabic version of the 20-item Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID), Patient Health Questionnaire 9, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scales, respectively. Multiple hierarchical logistic regression models were used to estimate the significant factors associated with diabetes distress, depression, and anxiety. A total of 403 individuals with T2DM were interviewed. The prevalence of severe diabetes distress was 13.4% (95% CI: 10.1-16.7), while prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms was 9.2% (95% CI: 6.4-12.0%), and 4.0% (95% CI: 2.1-5.9), respectively. In a series of hierarchical logistic regression models, significant predictors for diabetes distress were being married, illiterate, not-working, living with insufficient income, and having multi-comorbidities. Likewise, the significant predictors for depression and anxiety were elevated glycated hemoglobin level and the higher PAID total score, while having multi-comorbidities was a significant predictor for anxiety only. Diabetes distress was more prevalent than depressive and anxiety symptoms in this study population. Several sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were identified to be related with psychological problems among patients with T2DM, which necessitate a multidisciplinary team-based approach for optimal screening and management.

Guided self-determination intervention versus attention control for people with type 2 diabetes in outpatient clinics: a protocol for a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

In the management of type 2 diabetes, autonomy-supporting interventions may be a prerequisite to achieving more long-term improvement. Preliminary evidence has shown that the guided self-determination (GSD) method might have an effect on haemoglobin A1c and diabetes distress in people with type 1 diabetes. Previous trials were at risk of uncertainty. Thus, the objective is to investigate the benefits and harms of a GSD intervention versus an attention control group intervention in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This trial protocol is guided by the The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for International Trials Statement. We describe the protocol for a pragmatic randomised, dual-centre, parallel-group, superiority clinical trial testing a GSD intervention versus an attention control for people with type 2 diabetes in outpatient clinics. The participants (n=224) will be recruited from two diverse regions of Denmark. The experimental stepped-care intervention will consist of three to five GSD sessions lasting up to 1 hour with a trained GSD facilitator. The sessions will be conducted face to face, by video conference or over the telephone. The attention controls will receive three to five sessions lasting up to an hour with a communication-trained healthcare professional provided face to-face, by video conference, or over the telephone. Participants will be included if they have type 2 diabetes,>18 years old, are not pregnant. Participants will be assessed before randomisation, at 5-month, and 12-month follow-up, the latter being the primary. The primary outcome is diabetes distress. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, depressive symptoms and non-serious adverse events. Exploratory outcomes are haemoglobin A1c, motivation and serious adverse events. Data will be collected using REDCap and analysed using Stata V.16.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol, the Helsinki Declaration in its latest form, International Harmonisation of Good Clinical Practice guidelines and the applicable regulatory requirement(s). The trial has been approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (P-2020-864). The Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark reviewed the trial protocol, but exempted the trial protocol from full review (H-20003638). The results of the trial will be presented at the outpatient clinics treating people with type 2 diabetes, at national and international conferences as well as to associations for people with diabetes and their relatives.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04601311.

Perceptions and correlates of distress due to the COVID-19 pandemic and stress management strategies among people with diabetes: a mixed methods study

Background

Greater risk of adverse health outcomes and public health measures have increased distress among people with diabetes during the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The objectives of this study were to explore how the experiences of people with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic differ according to sociodemographic characteristics and identify diabetes-related psychosocial correlates of COVID distress.

Methods

Patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes were recruited from clinics and community health centres in Toronto, Ontario, as well as patient networks. Participants were interviewed to explore the experiences of people with diabetes with varied sociodemographic and clinical identities, with respect to wellness (physical, emotional, social, financial, occupational), level of stress and management strategies. Multiple linear regression was used to assess the relationships between diabetes distress, diabetes self-efficacy and resilient coping with COVID distress.

Results

Interviews revealed that specific aspects of psychosocial wellness affected by the pandemic, and stress and illness management strategies utilized by people with diabetes differed based on socioeconomic status, gender, type of diabetes and race. Resilient coping (β=−0.0517; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.0918 to −0.0116; p=0.012), diabetes distress (β=0.0260; 95% CI, 0.0149 to 0.0371; p<0.0001) and diabetes self-efficacy (β=−0.0184; 95% CI, −0.0316 to −0.0052; p=0.007) were significantly associated with COVID distress.

Conclusions

Certain subgroups of people with diabetes have experienced a disproportionate amount of COVID distress. Assessing correlates of COVID distress among people with diabetes will help inform interventions such as diabetes self-management education to address the psychosocial distress caused by the pandemic.

The utility of Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale amongst patients with Type 2 diabetes (T2DM): An experience from a teaching hospital in Southern India

Objectives:

The purpose of this study was to establish the prevalence of diabetes-specific psychological distress (DSPD) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using the “Problem areas in diabetes” (PAID) scale at a teaching hospital in southern India. Other objectives included observing the relationship between socio-demographic factors and DSPD and, finally exploring the level of acceptance of the PAID scale by Asian–Indian patients.

Methods:

The patients with T2DM aged >18 years attending the diabetes outpatient clinic were recruited. They completed two sets of questionnaires; PAID and a satisfactory questionnaire, which included socio-demographic characteristics and questions relating to the acceptance of PAID. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 13.1 and Excel.

Results:

A total of 253 questionnaires were completed, including 157 (62.1%) male and 96 (37.9%) female patients. The prevalence of DSPD was 32.8% (83/253). Younger age (OR 3.65, 95% CI 1.36–9.80) and presence of retinopathy (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.12–6.04) were significantly associated with DSPD. However, it was observed that one-third of the patients had an elevated level of distress regardless of socio-demographic or clinical factors. PAID was well accepted by the participants and 84.6% (214/253) were pleased to complete it again.

Conclusion:

About one-third of the patients with T2DM had DSPD. Psychological distress was higher in the younger age group and those with retinopathy. PAID is an easy, well-accepted questionnaire and would serve as a useful tool to screen for DSPD.

Type 2 diabetes and COPD: treatment in the right healthcare setting? An observational study

Background

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and COPD are chronic medical conditions, for which patients need lifelong healthcare. The aim of this study is to examine in which healthcare setting patients with T2DM and COPD receive their care, and if this is the correct healthcare setting according to guidelines.

Method

T2DM and COPD patients from five primary care practices were included. Data concerning healthcare setting and patient- and clinical characteristics were extracted from the electronic medical records. Patient profiles treated in primary care were compared with the profiles of those treated in secondary care. In patients treated in secondary care we evaluated whether treatment allocation was according to the guidelines and if back-referral to primary care should take place.

Results

Of the T2DM and COPD patients 7.6% and 29.6% respectively, were treated in secondary care, and 72.7% respectively 31.4% of these were according to the guideline. T2DM patients treated in primary care were older (63 versus 57 years, p < 0.01, had a shorter diabetes duration (8 versus 11 years, p < 0.01) and lower HbA1c (53.0 versus 63.5 mmol/l, p < 0.01) than those treated in secondary care. Those with COPD treated in primary care used less inhalation medication (75.2 versus 90.1%, p < 0.01) and had better spirometry results (67.39 versus 57.53 FEV₁%pred, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The majority of the patients with T2DM and COPD were correctly treated in primary care and on average patients with a better health condition were treated in primary care.. Also, those who were treated in secondary care were most of the time treated in the correct treatment setting according to the guidelines.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01424-w.

Diabetes related distress is high in inpatients with diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to assess diabetes-related distress in inpatients and its association with metabolic control in people with diabetes type 1 (DM1) and type 2 (DM2).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 107 inpatients with DM1 (age 45.9 years, diabetes duration 18.7 years, HbA1c 8.4%/67.8 mmol/mol) and 109 with DM2 (age 62.0 years, diabetes duration 16.2 years, HbA1c 8.9%/74.3 mmol/mol) from a University department for endocrinology and metabolic diseases (Germany) were included over 2 years. Diabetes-related distress was assessed with the PAID questionnaire (range 0-100, higher scores imply higher diabetes-related distress, cut-off ≥ 40). The PAID questionnaire was completed by 214 of 216 participants.

RESULTS

Fifty-one of 214 individuals (23.8%) showed high distress (PAID score ≥ 40). The mean PAID score was 28.1 ± 17.5 in all participants with no difference between DM1 and DM2 (28.1 ± 17.4 vs. 26.2 ± 16.9, p = 0.532). Individuals with DM2 on insulin scored higher than patients without insulin (27.8 ± 17.6 vs. 18.7 ± 8.5, p = 0.004). Additionally, people with DM1 treated with a system for continuous glucose monitoring (n = 50, 33.1 ± 18.8) scored higher than participants without such system (n = 32, 20.6 ± 13.3, p = 0.001). HbA1c was not correlated with the PAID score in both, DM1 (r = 0.040, p = 0.684) and DM2 (r = - 0.024, p = 0.804). Participants with DM2 and severe hypoglycaemia/last 12 months scored higher than people without (PAID score 43.0 ± 20.4 vs. 25.1 ± 16.5, p = 0.026). Frequency of non-severe hypoglycaemia was not associated with the PAID score in DM1 and DM2.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with diabetes treated in hospital for problems with diabetes suffer frequently from diabetes-related distress (~ 24%) regardless of diabetes type.

Prevalence of Diabetes Related Distress and Associated Factors Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients Attending Hospitals, Southwest Ethiopia, 2020: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes related distress is the most common psychological co-morbid condition among type 2 diabetes patients. However, although the number of people living with diabetes has continued to increase over the last 10 years, information regarding diabetes related distress is limited in Ethiopia.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to assess the prevalence of diabetes related distress and associated factors among type 2 diabetes patients attending hospitals in Southwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was employed on 360 type 2 diabetes patients attending hospitals from January 1 to March 30, 2020. Convenient sampling technique was used to select study participants. Data were entered into EpiData manager version 4.2.2 and exported to Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 and analyzed using descriptive statistics, bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions. The statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Out of a total 360 patients recruited, 321 (89.2%) patients (201 male and 120 female) were involved in the study. The mean age of the participants was 41.3 (SD = 12.8) years. The prevalence of diabetes related distress was 118 (36.8%) in which emotional distress was the most prevalent (43.6%) domain. Level of education [AOR 4.55; 95% CI: 1.28-16.19], family or social support [AOR 0.62; 95% CI: 0.33-1.06], duration of diabetes [AOR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.35-1.55], having diabetes complications [AOR 1.98; 95% CI: 1.0-3.86], smoking status [AOR 1.6; 95% CI: 1.12-2.97] and alcohol consumption status [AOR 1.4; 95% CI: 1.07-2.53] were the identified factors of diabetes related distress.

CONCLUSION

Diabetes related distress was highly prevalent in type 2 diabetes patients. Healthcare providers need to address this through integrating psychosocial care with collaborative medical care.

Diabetes Distress and Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes: Mediator and Moderator Analysis of a Peer Support Intervention

Background

High levels of psychosocial distress are correlated with worse glycemic control as measured by glycosylated hemoglobin levels (HbA_1c). Some interventions specifically targeting diabetes distress have been shown to lead to lower HbA_1c values, but the underlying mechanisms mediating this improvement are unknown. In addition, while type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) disproportionately affects low-income racial and ethnic minority populations, it is unclear whether interventions targeting distress are differentially effective depending on participants’ baseline characteristics.

Objective

Our objective was to evaluate the mediators and moderators that would inform interventions for improvements in both glycemic control and diabetes distress.

Methods

Our target population included 290 Veterans Affairs patients with T2D enrolled in a comparative effectiveness trial of peer support alone versus technology-enhanced peer support with primary and secondary outcomes including HbA_1c and diabetes distress at 6 months. Participants in both arms had significant improvements in both HbA_1c and diabetes distress at 6 months, so the arms were pooled for all analyses. Goal setting, perceived competence, intrinsic motivation, and decisional conflict were evaluated as possible mediators of improvements in both diabetes distress and HbA_1c. Baseline patient characteristics evaluated as potential moderators included age, race, highest level of education attained, employment status, income, health literacy, duration of diabetes, insulin use, baseline HbA_1c, diabetes-specific social support, and depression.

Results

Among the primarily African American male veterans with T2D, the median age was 63 (SD 10.2) years with a baseline mean HbA_1c of 9.1% (SD 1.7%). Improvements in diabetes distress were correlated with improvements in HbA_1c in both bivariate and multivariable models adjusted for age, race, health literacy, duration of diabetes, and baseline HbA_1c. Improved goal setting and perceived competence were found to mediate both the improvements in diabetes distress and in HbA_1c, together accounting for 20% of the effect of diabetes distress on change in HbA_1c. Race and insulin use were found to be significant moderators of improvements in diabetes distress and improved HbA_1c.

Conclusions

Prior studies have demonstrated that some but not all interventions that improve diabetes distress can lead to improved glycemic control. This study found that both improved goal setting and perceived competence over the course of the peer support intervention mediated both improved diabetes distress and improved HbA_1c. This suggests that future interventions targeting diabetes distress should also incorporate elements to increase goal setting and perceived competence. The intervention effect of improvements in diabetes distress on glycemic control in peer support may be more pronounced among White and insulin-dependent veterans. Additional research is needed to understand how to better target diabetes distress and glycemic control in other vulnerable populations.

Diabetes-Related Distress and Its Associated Factors Among Patients with Diabetes in Vietnam

Background

Psychometric properties are regarded as one of the significant contributors related to diabetes treatment efficacy. Diabetes-related distress (DD) is one of the emotional burdens. The aims of this study were to investigate the prevalence of DD and to determine its associated factors among Vietnamese diabetic patients.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at a single medical center in the central of Vietnam. A total of 138 eligible DM outpatients were invited and a total of 112 patients who completed the questionnaire were utilized in this analysis using convenience sampling. DD was assessed using the diabetes distress scale (DDS). The participant’s sociodemographic and clinical information was obtained through face-to-face interviews and medical records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent factors associated with the presence of DD.

Results

Approximately, 12.5% of the patients experienced DD based on DDS self-administered questionnaire. The rates of mild/moderate and high distress were 8.0% and 4.5%, respectively. DD was found to be significantly higher in type 1 DM (p=0.04), insulin only in treatment regime (p=0.04), physical inactivities (p=0.02), times of mild hypoglycemia (time/month) (p=0.01), and fasting plasma glucose (mmol/l) (p=0.04). The occurrence of distress among DM patients was negatively correlated with their age and amount of physical exercise. Meanwhile, poor HbA1c control (HbA1c≥7%) was associated with an increased occurrence of diabetes distress.

Conclusion

The findings of single medical center in Vietnam highlights that DD is prevalent among DM patients. It should be of marked concerns, particularly the type 1 diabetic patients, younger age, and poor glycemic control patients.

The joint association of diabetes distress and depressive symptoms with all-cause mortality in Japanese individuals with type 2 diabetes: a prospective cohort study (Diabetes Distress and Care Registry in Tenri [DDCRT 20])

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The independent association of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress with mortality risk in individuals with diabetes has not been evaluated. We examined the temporal joint association of diabetes distress and depressive symptoms at baseline and the subsequent risk of all-cause mortality.

METHODS

The longitudinal data of 3118 individuals with type 2 diabetes were obtained from a large Japanese diabetes registry. To assess the joint association of diabetes distress and depressive symptoms at baseline with the subsequent risk of all-cause mortality, the Cox proportional hazards model was used with adjustment for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The mean age, BMI and HbA_1c levels were 64.7 years, 24.6 kg/m² and 58.6 mmol/mol (7.5%), respectively, and 38.1% of the participants were women. In the multivariable-adjusted models evaluating the diabetes distress and depressive symptoms separately, the HRs for all-cause mortality were 1.67 (95% CI 1.14, 2.43; p = 0.008) and 1.40 (95% CI 1.05, 1.85; p = 0.020), respectively. In such models evaluating the joint association of diabetes distress and depressive symptoms, compared with individuals without diabetes distress or depressive symptoms (DD^-/DS^-), the HRs for all-cause mortality for the group without diabetes distress but with depressive symptoms (DD^-/DS⁺), with diabetes distress but without depressive symptoms (DD⁺/DS^-), and with diabetes distress and depressive symptoms (DD⁺/DS⁺) were 1.34 (95% CI 0.99, 1.86; p = 0.056), 1.96 (95% CI 1.10, 3.50; p = 0.023) and 1.71 (95% CI 1.06, 2.77; p = 0.029), respectively. We did not observe a significant interaction between diabetes distress and depressive symptoms with all-cause mortality risk (p = 0.2636). In the stratified analysis by sex, a significant joint association of diabetes distress and depressive symptoms with the risk of all-cause mortality was observed only in men.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Diabetes distress and depressive symptoms were independently associated with all-cause mortality risk in male participants with type 2 diabetes, but we did not observe a significant interaction between diabetes distress and depressive symptoms in relation to all-cause mortality. Graphical abstract.

Diabetes-Related Distress and Associated Characteristics in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in an Urban Primary Care Setting in Greece

Background

Diabetes-related distress (DRD) is a common psychological issue of people living with diabetes. International guidelines advise to take DRD into consideration in diabetes care but evidence for Greece is scarce. In the present study we aimed to estimate the frequency of DRD as assessed by Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and to examine its connections with clinical and sociodemographic characteristics among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) in urban primary care (PC) in Greece.

Methods

This descriptive survey included adults with a diagnosis of T2D of at least six months under medication treatment attending a novel, public urban PC unit. Patients with other forms of diabetes, dementia, and psychosis were excluded. Patients were screened for DRD with DDS instrument and correlations were made between DRD and clinical and sociodemographic characteristics.

Results

In 135 eligible participants the frequency of moderate to high levels of DRD (DDS ≥ 2) was 24.4% and of high levels of DRD (DDS ≥ 3) was 7.4%. Emotional burden (EB) subscale was significantly correlated with younger age, insulin use, duration of insulin use, and the number of insulin injections per day. Longer diabetes duration showed significant correlation with DDS total, EB, and regimen distress. Participants with lower income, sedentary lifestyle, micro-vascular complications, more episodes of hypoglycaemia, and higher levels of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) experienced significantly higher distress.

Conclusion

DRD screening is important in urban PC and in more susceptible patients as those on more insulin injections per day, with longer diabetes duration, higher levels of HbA1c, lower income, sedentary lifestyle, and more episodes of hypoglycaemia.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Related Distress in Thailand

This study aimed to investigate prevalence and factors potentially associated with diabetes-related distress (DRD) among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients in a primary health care center in Thailand. This cross-sectional study was conducted with a total of 370 patients with T2DM. Data were collected at primary health care centers in Hang Dong District, Chiang Mai Province, Thailand. DRD was assessed using the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS-17). The association between sociodemographic characteristics and other factors with DRD was analyzed using the Fisher t-test, Chi-square test, and Pearson's correlation coefficient test. The association between Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and DRD was analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis. The participants had a mean age of 60.95 ± 7.96, and most were female (68.1%). Of the participants with DRD, 8.9% had moderate to high levels of distress. Education level and family support were significantly associated with the overall level of DRD. Additionally, HbA1c and co-morbidity were also significantly associated with DRD, as were emotional burden and regimen distress. Multiple linear regression analysis found that increased HbA1c was positively associated with increased DRD after adjusting for age, sex, education, duration of T2DM, co-morbidity, diabetic complications, and family support. Screening with DRD may be beneficial in T2DM patients.

Frequência de sofrimento emocional é elevada em pessoas com diabetes assistidas na atenção primária

Introdução: Pessoas com diabetes podem sofrer com o estresse da doença e apresentar sentimentos como culpa, raiva, medo e depressão, que caracterizam o Sofrimento Emocional Específico da Diabetes. Objetivo: estimar a frequência desse sofrimento e seus fatores associados em pessoas assistidas na atenção primária em Blumenau, Santa Catarina. Métodos: Trata-se de estudo transversal. Pessoas com diabetes assistidas por 4 equipes de saúde da família (n=196) responderam ao questionário “Problems Areas in Diabetes”, que apresenta 20 questões em 4 subdimensões, além de questões sobre suas características sociodemográficas (sexo, idade, escolaridade) e clínicas (tempo de doença, uso de insulina e medicação antidepressiva). Estimou-se os escores de sofrimento geral e subdimensões com base na soma das respostas em escala de 0 (melhor) a 100 (pior). Mediu-se a frequência do sofrimento emocional grave (escore >40) e sua associação com as variáveis de estudo por regressão logística não condicional. Resultados: Participaram 196 pessoas, 58,2% eram mulheres, 26,2% faziam uso de insulina e 20,6% de antidepressivos. A idade média foi de 61,6 anos, o tempo médio de tratamento de diabetes foi 9,5 anos. O escore médio de sofrimento emocional foi de 33,6 (dp=27,6) e mediana de 23,8. 36,2% dos participantes apresentaram sofrimento emocional grave. O sofrimento emocional grave se mostrou principalmente entre pessoas com 19 a 64 anos (OR=2,1, IC95%1,1 - 4,1), com tempo de doença de 2 a 5 anos (OR=6,4; IC95% 1,1 - 36,1) e 5 anos e mais (OR=5,4; IC95% 1,1 - 28,8) e em uso de medicação antidepressiva (OR=2,8 IC95% 1,3 - 6,0). Conclusão: Mais de um terço das pessoas com diabetes tem sofrimento emocional grave, marcadamente os adultos com mais tempo de doença e com tratamento para depressão. Sugere-se que essas pessoas tenham seu cuidado priorizado pelas equipes de saúde na atenção primária.

Self-care of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus over the course of illness: implications for tailoring support

Purpose

Type 2 diabetes requires patients to make lifestyle changes and perform daily self-care. To determine at what stages patients may need particular self-management support, we examined (1) whether patients' performance of self-care related to their diabetes duration, and (2) whether illness characteristics (treatment and complications) and diabetes-related distress influenced this relationship.

Methods

Cross-sectional data from 590 type 2 diabetes patients were analysed through linear and logistic regression analysis. Self-care behaviours were assessed by the revised Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) measure. Diabetes duration (model 1), treatment and complications (model 2), and distress, as assessed by the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID) scale (model 3), were stepwise included. Sociodemographic characteristics were added to all models to account for confounding.

Results

Patients with a longer history of diabetes were less physically active, but monitored their blood glucose levels more frequently than more recently diagnosed patients. These relationships were mediated by the presence of complications and the use of insulin, with lower levels of physical activity being found among patients with macrovascular complications and higher frequencies of glucose monitoring among patients on insulin. All predictors together explained maximally 5% of the variance in self-care, except for glucose monitoring (37%) and smoking (11%).

Conclusion

Type 2 diabetes patients' self-care activity changes over the course of illness. To provide tailored self-management support, diabetes care providers should take into account patients' phase of illness, including their treatment and complications, as well as their personal characteristics and distress level.

Diabetes distress in Indonesian patients with type 2 diabetes: a comparison between primary and tertiary care

BACKGROUND

The number of people living with diabetes mellitus (DM) in Indonesia has continued to increase over the last 6 years. Four previous studies in U.S have found that higher DD scores were associated with worse psychological outcomes, lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and increased risk of T2DM complications. In this study, we aimed to firstly compare DD scores in Indonesian T2DM outpatients treated in primary care versus those in tertiary care. Subsequently, we investigated whether socio-demographic characteristics and clinical conditions explain potential differences in DD score across healthcare settings.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted on Java island in three primary care (n = 108) and four tertiary care (n = 524) facilities. The participants completed the Bahasa Indonesia version of the Diabetes Distress Scale questionnaire (DDS17 Bahasa Indonesia). Ordinal regression analysis was conducted with the quartile of the summation of the DD score as the dependent variable to investigate how the association between the level of healthcare facilities and DD altered when adding different variables in the model.

RESULTS

The final adjusted model showed that the level of healthcare facilities was strongly associated with DD (p < .001), with participants in primary care having a 3.68 times (95% CI 2.46-5.55) higher likelihood of being more distressed than the participants in tertiary care. This association was detected after including the socio-demographic characteristics and clinical conditions as model confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study in Indonesia to compare DD scores within different healthcare facilities. We recommend a regular DD assessment, possibly closely aligned with health-literacy partner programs, especially for T2DM patients in primary care settings.

Diabetes distress in Indonesian patients with type 2 diabetes: a comparison between primary and tertiary care

BACKGROUND

The number of people living with diabetes mellitus (DM) in Indonesia has continued to increase over the last 6 years. Four previous studies in U.S have found that higher DD scores were associated with worse psychological outcomes, lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and increased risk of T2DM complications. In this study, we aimed to firstly compare DD scores in Indonesian T2DM outpatients treated in primary care versus those in tertiary care. Subsequently, we investigated whether socio-demographic characteristics and clinical conditions explain potential differences in DD score across healthcare settings.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted on Java island in three primary care (n = 108) and four tertiary care (n = 524) facilities. The participants completed the Bahasa Indonesia version of the Diabetes Distress Scale questionnaire (DDS17 Bahasa Indonesia). Ordinal regression analysis was conducted with the quartile of the summation of the DD score as the dependent variable to investigate how the association between the level of healthcare facilities and DD altered when adding different variables in the model.

RESULTS

The final adjusted model showed that the level of healthcare facilities was strongly associated with DD (p < .001), with participants in primary care having a 3.68 times (95% CI 2.46-5.55) higher likelihood of being more distressed than the participants in tertiary care. This association was detected after including the socio-demographic characteristics and clinical conditions as model confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study in Indonesia to compare DD scores within different healthcare facilities. We recommend a regular DD assessment, possibly closely aligned with health-literacy partner programs, especially for T2DM patients in primary care settings.

Effect of diabetic counseling based on conversation map as compared to routine counseling on diabetes management self-efficacy and diabetic distress among patients with diabetes in Pakistan: a randomized controlled trial (study protocol)

Background

Novel interactive and pictorial health education tool named Diabetes Conversation Map (DCM) might be effective for the improvement of diabetes management self-efficacy (DMSE) and diabetes distress (DD) among diabetic patients in lower middle-income setting. This study protocol will assess the effectiveness of DCM as compared to routine care (RC) to improve DMSE, decrease DD and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

Methods

This will be two arms randomized controlled trial, conducted at national institute of diabetes and endocrinology (NIDE) in Karachi, Pakistan. A sample of 120 T2DM patients of age 30–60 years with suboptimal diabetes control will be screened through eligibility criteria and DD screening tool. Patients who fulfill the eligibility criteria and have diabetes distress will be randomized into interventional and control arm. The intervention arm will receive four education sessions (40 min each) using DCM for 4 weeks duration of enrollment. Controlled arm will receive RC. DMSE and DD will be measured using the validated Likert tools at baseline and after 3 months of enrollment. Latest results of HbA1c will be retrieved from the respective medical record files at baseline and 3 months. Change in DMSE, DD scores and HbA1c levels within groups (pre-post) and between the groups after 3 months of enrollment will be compared. Multivariable linear regression will be conducted to adjust for any potential confounders.

Discussion

In a study in UK, 70% of the patients with diabetes reported DCM had helped them in controlling their diabetes and recommended this method to teach other patients with diabetes also. In China, a study found that patients with diabetes who received DCM based education had significantly lower DD and significantly higher diabetes empowerment score after six months of the intervention as compared to the traditional counselling. A cross sectional study conducted in Pakistan also demonstrated that teaching based on DCM was useful in improving the knowledge, attitude and practices of patients with T2DM. Besides, no other study has evaluated the effectiveness of these novel tools for DMSE and diabetes distress DD in well-designed, sufficiently powered clinical trials.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03747471. Date of registration: Nov 20. 2018. Version and Date of Protocol: Version 1, IRB Approval date 28 June 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-7266-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Addressing diabetes distress in clinical care: a practical guide

Addressing the emotional side of diabetes and its management has received considerable attention in recent years. At the centre of most of these efforts is the concept of 'diabetes distress', a generic term that captures the primary sources and intensity of emotional distress associated with diabetes and its management over time. As interest in diabetes distress has grown, however, it has been difficult to integrate and translate the various strands of clinical research in a manner that can guide diabetes distress intervention efforts in the real world of clinical care. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap by outlining practical strategies for intervention in clinical settings and to assist diabetes healthcare professionals in thinking through how diabetes distress might be addressed practically in their clinics. To address these goals, this review is divided into five sections: a definition of diabetes distress, ways diabetes distress can be assessed and monitored, information about diabetes distress for use in intervention planning, topics to be considered for inclusion in diabetes distress interventions, and alternatives for where in the care process a diabetes distress intervention might be considered. We focus on diabetes distress experienced by adults with both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.

Psychosocial health care needs of people with type 2 diabetes in primary care: Views of patients and health care providers

Aims

This study examined (a) psychosocial health care needs of people with type 2 diabetes from the perspective of patients and diabetes healthcare providers in primary care, in terms of topics, attention in diabetes care and preferences and (b) factors associated with a positive attitude towards specialized psychosocial health care.

Design

Qualitative focus group study.

Methods

Using purposive sampling, participants were selected from general practices. In 2012–2013, three focus groups were conducted in people with type 2 diabetes (N = 20) and three with healthcare providers (N = 18).

Results

Opinions differed considerably on whether there was a need for psychosocial health care. Topics focused mainly on diabetes‐specific issues ranging from a need for additional diabetes education to attention and support in regular diabetes care. However, not all healthcare providers felt competent enough to address psychosocial problems. Some participants reported a need for specialized psychosocial help. A positive attitude towards specialized psychosocial health care appeared to be influenced by care setting (e.g., in the primary care practice or ‘outside’ mental health care), care accessibility, proactive discussion of psychosocial issues with and referral by healthcare providers and previous experiences with psychosocial health care.

Conclusion

Although only few participants expressed a need for specialized psychosocial care, attention for psychosocial well‐being in regular diabetes care was generally appreciated.

Impact

People with type 2 diabetes generally felt psychosocial care could be provided as part of regular diabetes care. Suggestions for healthcare providers to meet psychosocial health care needs include training and discussion tools.

Psychosocial interventions for reducing diabetes distress in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diabetes distress (DD) disproportionately affects vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus and interventions targeting this population are therefore relevant. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the evidence for an effect of psychosocial interventions for reducing DD, and, secondly HbA1c, depression, and health-related quality of life in vulnerable people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Vulnerability encompasses poor glycemic control (HbA1c >7.5%) and at least one additional risk factor for poor diabetes outcomes such as low educational level, comorbidity, and risky lifestyle behavior. The interventions should be theoretically founded and include cognition- or emotion-focused elements. We systematically searched four databases for articles published between January 1995 and March 2018. Eighteen studies testing a variety of psychosocial interventions in 4,066 patients were included. We adhered to the Cochrane methodology and PRISMA guidelines. Review Manager 5.3 was used for data extraction and risk of bias assessment, and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation for assessing the quality of the evidence. Data were pooled using the fixed or random effects method as appropriate. We investigated effects of individual vs group, intensive vs brief interventions, and interventions with and without motivational interviewing in subgroup analyses. To assess the robustness of effect estimates, sensitivity analyses excluding studies with high risk of bias and attrition >20% were conducted. We found low to moderate quality evidence for a significant small effect of psychosocial interventions on DD, and very low to moderate quality evidence for no effect on HbA1c, both outcomes assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up. The effect on depression was small, while there was no effect on health-related quality of life. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that interventions using motivational interviewing and individual interventions were associated with incremental effects on DD. Likewise, intensive interventions were associated with significant reductions in both DD and HbA1c.

High Diabetes Distress Among Ethnic Minorities Is Not Explained by Metabolic, Cardiovascular, or Lifestyle Factors: Findings From the Dutch Diabetes Pearl Cohort

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes distress among patients from ethnic minorities is still poorly understood. We investigated the association between ethnicity and diabetes distress among ethnic minority groups of people with type 2 diabetes in the Netherlands, focusing on the possible effects of glycemic control, lifestyle factors, cardiovascular risk factors, and diabetes complications.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Cross-sectional data from the Dutch Diabetes Pearl cohort included people with type 2 diabetes from primary, secondary, and tertiary diabetes care programs. We used the 20-item Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey (PAID) scale to assess diabetes distress; a score ≥40 is considered to represent high distress. Ethnicity was estimated on the basis of country of birth. Sociodemographic and lifestyle data were self-reported; cardiovascular and metabolic data were retrieved from medical charts. Logistic regression analysis determined the association between ethnicity and diabetes distress, with Caucasians as the reference group.

RESULTS

Diabetes distress scores and ethnicity were available for 4,191 people with type 2 diabetes: 3,684 were Caucasian, 83 were Asian, 51 were Moroccan, 92 were African, 134 were Latin American, 46 were Turkish, and 101 were Hindustani-Surinamese. Overall, participants in minority groups had worse health outcomes than those of Caucasian descent, and diabetes distress was more prevalent (ranging from 9.6 to 31.7%, compared with 5.8% among Caucasians), even after adjusting for age, sex, education level, alcohol use, smoking, BMI, lipid profile, HbA_1c, medication use, and the presence of diabetes complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with type 2 diabetes in the Netherlands, ethnicity is independently associated with high diabetes distress. Further research is warranted to explain the higher prevalence of diabetes distress in minority groups and to develop effective interventions.

Managing Type 2 diabetes as a couple: The influence of partners' beliefs on diabetes distress over time

AIMS

Partners and spouses have an important role in supporting healthy self-care in adults with Type 2 diabetes. While evidence has shown that the beliefs held by people with diabetes influence emotional wellbeing, little is known about the long-term impact of partners' illness beliefs on diabetes distress.

METHODS

Persons with Type 2 diabetes (pwt2d) and their partners completed a questionnaire at baseline (N = 75 couples) and 12 months later (N = 45 couples). Measures included demographic/clinical parameters, the Revised Illness Perception questionnaire, and the Diabetes Distress Scale. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to examine change in measures over time. Multiple regression and moderation analysis were used to explore the indirect influence of partners beliefs on diabetes distress at baseline and follow-up.

RESULTS

Illness perceptions and diabetes distress in pwt2d and partners did not change overtime. Partners' beliefs about the controllability, chronicity, and predictability of symptoms of diabetes moderated the relationship between the corresponding pwt2d beliefs and diabetes distress. These indirect effects were observed across both time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Conflicting illness perceptions about the controllability and chronicity of diabetes, and congruous negative perceptions about diabetes symptoms among couples sustain distress overtime. Targeting the beliefs of couples to improve communication and understanding may reduce diabetes distress.

Attending Diabetes Clinics is associated with a lower all-cause mortality. A meta-analysis of observational studies performed in Italy

OBJECTIVE

The epidemiological explosion of diabetes is a challenge for Health Systems and the identification of the most appropriate models of care are warranted. The inclusion of primary care physicians in the models is unquestioned whereas the role played by secondary and tertiary care (Diabetes Clinic) is often debated. However, studies focusing on hard endpoints and comparing Diabetes Clinic attendance vs. no attendance are scant.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed including all observational cohort studies performed in Italy, reporting crude and/or adjusted estimates of all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes attending or not attending Diabetes Clinics. Attendance was defined by prescriptions and reimbursement of specialist visits by the National Health System.

RESULTS

Three studies enrolling 191,847 subjects with diabetes were included in the analysis, and about half of them had at least one visit in the Diabetes Clinic per year. During the follow-up, ranging 1-11 years, 9653 subjects died. Mortality was remarkably lower in subjects attending Diabetes Clinic (MH-OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.88, p = 0.002). Results were confirmed after adjusting for confounders (MH-OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.95, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that attending Diabetes Clinics is associated with a lower all-cause mortality. This finding might be instrumental to implement the best models of care for persons with diabetes.

Reducing diabetes distress and improving self-management with mindfulness

Stress associated with diabetes makes managing diabetes harder. We investigated whether mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) could reduce diabetes distress and improve management. We recruited 38 participants to complete an MBSR program. Surveys and lab values were completed at baseline and post-intervention. Participants showed significant improvement in diabetes-related distress (Cohen's d -.71, p < .002), psychosocial self-efficacy (Cohen's d .80, p < .001), and glucose control (Cohen's d -.79, p < .001). Significant improvements in depression, anxiety, stress, coping, self-compassion, and social support were also found. These results suggest that MBSR may offer an effective method for helping people better self-manage their diabetes and improve mental health.

The association of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress with glycaemic control and diabetes complications over 2 years in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a prospective cohort study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We examined the associations between depressive symptoms and diabetes distress with glycaemic control and diabetes complications over 2 years, after diagnosis of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

In a multi-ethnic, primary care cohort (n = 1735) of adults, all with recent (<6 months) diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, we measured the associations between depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] score ≥10) and diabetes distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes [PAID] score ≥40), with change in 2 year HbA_1c as the primary outcome and with incident rates of diabetes complications as secondary outcomes. Multivariate models were used to account for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 1651 participants (95.2%) of the total primary care cohort with available baseline PHQ-9 and PAID scores, mean ± SD age was 56.2 ± 11.1 years, 55.1% were men and 49.1% were of non-white ethnicity; 232 (14.1%) and 111 (6.7%) had depressive symptoms and diabetes distress, respectively. After adjustment for confounders, depressive symptoms were not associated with worsening HbA_1c. After adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, vascular risk factors and diabetes treatments, depressive symptoms were associated with increased risk of incident macrovascular complications (OR 2.78 [95% CI 1.19, 6.49], p = 0.018) but not microvascular complications. This was attenuated (p = 0.09) after adjustment for IL-1 receptor antagonist concentration. Diabetes distress was not associated with worsening HbA_1c or incident complications.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

In the first 2 years of type 2 diabetes, the effect of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress on glycaemic control is minimal. There was, however, an association between depressive symptoms and incidence of macrovascular complications. Elevated innate inflammation may be common to both depression and macrovascular diabetes complications, but these findings require replication.

Psychological interventions for diabetes-related distress in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Many adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) experience a psychosocial burden and mental health problems associated with the disease. Diabetes-related distress (DRD) has distinct effects on self-care behaviours and disease control. Improving DRD in adults with T2DM could enhance psychological well-being, health-related quality of life, self-care abilities and disease control, also reducing depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychological interventions for diabetes-related distress in adults with T2DM.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, BASE, WHO ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the last search was December 2014 for BASE and 21 September 2016 for all other databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of psychological interventions for DRD in adults (18 years and older) with T2DM. We included trials if they compared different psychological interventions or compared a psychological intervention with usual care. Primary outcomes were DRD, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were self-efficacy, glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), blood pressure, diabetes-related complications, all-cause mortality and socioeconomic effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified publications for inclusion and extracted data. We classified interventions according to their focus on emotion, cognition or emotion-cognition. We performed random-effects meta-analyses to compute overall estimates.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 30 RCTs with 9177 participants. Sixteen trials were parallel two-arm RCTs, and seven were three-arm parallel trials. There were also seven cluster-randomised trials: two had four arms, and the remaining five had two arms. The median duration of the intervention was six months (range 1 week to 24 months), and the median follow-up period was 12 months (range 0 to 12 months). The trials included a wide spectrum of interventions and were both individual- and group-based.A meta-analysis of all psychological interventions combined versus usual care showed no firm effect on DRD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07; 95% CI -0.16 to 0.03; P = 0.17; 3315 participants; 12 trials; low-quality evidence), HRQoL (SMD 0.01; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.11; P = 0.87; 1932 participants; 5 trials; low-quality evidence), all-cause mortality (11 per 1000 versus 11 per 1000; risk ratio (RR) 1.01; 95% CI 0.17 to 6.03; P = 0.99; 1376 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence) or adverse events (17 per 1000 versus 41 per 1000; RR 2.40; 95% CI 0.78 to 7.39; P = 0.13; 438 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence). We saw small beneficial effects on self-efficacy and HbA1c at medium-term follow-up (6 to 12 months): on self-efficacy the SMD was 0.15 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.30; P = 0.05; 2675 participants; 6 trials; low-quality evidence) in favour of psychological interventions; on HbA1c there was a mean difference (MD) of -0.14% (95% CI -0.27 to 0.00; P = 0.05; 3165 participants; 11 trials; low-quality evidence) in favour of psychological interventions. Our included trials did not report diabetes-related complications or socioeconomic effects.Many trials were small and were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data as well as possible performance and detection biases in the subjective questionnaire-based outcomes assessment, and some appeared to be at risk of selective reporting. There are four trials awaiting further classification. These are parallel RCTs with cognition-focused and emotion-cognition focused interventions. There are another 18 ongoing trials, likely focusing on emotion-cognition or cognition, assessing interventions such as diabetes self-management support, telephone-based cognitive behavioural therapy, stress management and a web application for problem solving in diabetes management. Most of these trials have a community setting and are based in the USA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence showed that none of the psychological interventions would improve DRD more than usual care. Low-quality evidence is available for improved self-efficacy and HbA1c after psychological interventions. This means that we are uncertain about the effects of psychological interventions on these outcomes. However, psychological interventions probably have no substantial adverse events compared to usual care. More high-quality research with emotion-focused programmes, in non-US and non-European settings and in low- and middle-income countries, is needed.

Screening for and subsequent participation in a trial for depression and anxiety in people with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care: Who do we reach?

AIMS

This study investigated (factors related to) (a) the response to a screening procedure for depression and anxiety in people with type 2 diabetes in primary care, and (b) participation in a subsequent randomised controlled trial targeting depressive or anxiety symptoms.

METHODS

People with type 2 diabetes (n=1837) received a screening questionnaire assessing depressive symptoms (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7). Eligible persons who scored above the cut-off score (PHQ-9≥7 or GAD-7≥8) were offered to participate in the trial.

RESULTS

In total, 798 people (43%) returned the screening questionnaire. Non-responders were more often female (53% vs 44%, p<0.001), had higher LDL cholesterol levels (Cohen's d=0.17, p=0.001) and a higher albumin/creatinine ratio (Cohen's d=0.08, p=0.01). In total, 130 people (18%) reported elevated depressive or anxiety symptoms. Twenty-seven persons agreed to participate in the trial. Factors related to participation were a high education level, a higher level of diabetes distress and a history of psychological problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Using screening as recruitment resulted in a small number of participants in a treatment trial for anxiety and depression. Research is needed to investigate whether screening is also followed by a low uptake of treatment in primary care outside a RCT setting.

What is diabetes distress and how can we measure it? A narrative review and conceptual model

BACKGROUND

Diabetes distress is the negative emotional impact of living with diabetes. It has tangible clinical importance, being associated with sub-optimal self-care and glycemic control. Diabetes distress has been operationalized in various ways and several measures exist. Measurement clarity is needed for both scientific and clinical reasons.

OBJECTIVES

To clarify the conceptualization and operationalization of diabetes distress, identify and distinguish relevant measures, and evaluate their appropriateness for this purpose.

RESULTS

Six measures were identified: Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale, Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS); Type I Diabetes Distress Scale (T1-DDS), Diabetes-specific Quality of Life Scale-Revised (DSQoLs-R) 'Burden and Restrictions-Daily Hassles' sub-scale, Well-being Questionnaire 28 (W-BQ 28) 'Diabetes Well-being' sub-scale, and Illness Perceptions Questionnaire-Revised (IPQ-R) 'Emotional Representations' sub-scale. Across these measures a broad spectrum of diabetes distress is captured, including distress associated with treatment regimen, food/eating, future/complications, hypoglycemia, social/interpersonal relationships, and healthcare professionals. No single measure appears fully comprehensive. Limited detail of the qualitative work informing scale design is reported, raising concerns about content validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Across the available measures diabetes distress is seemingly comprehensively assessed and measures should be considered in terms of their focus and scope to ensure the foci of interventions are appropriately targeted.

Diabetes-related burden and distress in people with diabetes mellitus at primary care level in Germany

AIMS

The importance of diabetes-related distress for the treatment of diabetes is emphasised in national and international guidelines recommending routinely screening for psychosocial problems. Data of investigations regarding diabetes-related distress on primary care are rare in Germany though most people with diabetes are treated without insulin therapy at primary care level.

METHODS

Three hundred and forty-five people with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2, n = 336, 229 without and 107 with insulin therapy) and type 1 (DM1, n = 9) were interviewed with the PAID questionnaire in the period from 1 October 2015 to 31 December 2015 in a general practice. A PAID score ≥40 (range 0-100) was considered as high diabetes-related distress.

RESULTS

The mean PAID score of all participants was 3.9 ± 7.0 (DM2 without insulin 2.7 ± 6.3, DM2 with insulin therapy 6.0 ± 8.0, DM1 6.8 ± 4.9) and far below the threshold of 40 points. Only 1.2% of all responders showed high diabetes-related distress (score ≥40). People on insulin therapy with HbA1c >7.5% and with diagnosed depression prior to the study scored significantly higher. Furthermore, there are weak correlations between the PAID score and HbA1c (r = 0.253, p < 0.001), duration of diabetes (r = 0.169, p = 0.002), insulin dosage (r = 0.283, p < 0.001) and age (r = -0.129, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Only 1.2% of our outpatients with diabetes on primary care level showed high diabetes-related distress. Higher rates in the current literature are probably due to not investigating on primary care level. Guidelines should consider this.

Ethnic Minorities with Diabetes Differ in Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms and Diabetes-Distress

Objective. To determine the association between ethnicity, diabetes-distress, and depressive and anxiety symptoms in adult outpatients with diabetes. Research Design and Methods. Diabetes-distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale, PAID5), depressive and anxiety symptoms (Extended Kessler-10, EK10), and quality of life (Short-Form 12, SF12) were assessed in an ethnic diverse diabetes outpatient population of a teaching hospital in Amsterdam. Descent of one's parents and self-classified ethnicity were obtained to define ethnicity. HbA1c, clinical data, and socioeconomic status were derived from the medical charts. Based on established cut-offs for PAID5- and EK10-scores, emotional distress was dichotomized for the purpose of logistic regression analyses. Results. Of 1007 consecutive patients approached, 575 participated. Forty-nine percent were of non-Dutch ethnicity and 24.7% had type 1 diabetes. Diabetes-distress was reported by 12.5% of the native Dutch patients and by 22.0%, 34.5%, and 42.6% of the Surinamese, Turkish, and Moroccan patients, respectively. Prevalence of depressive symptoms was 9.4% in native Dutch patients and 20.4%, 34.5%, and 27.3% in the other groups mentioned. Diabetes-distress and Moroccan origin were significantly associated (OR = 3.60, p < .01) as well as depressive symptoms and Turkish origin (OR = 4.23, p = .04). Conclusions. Different ethnic minorities with diabetes vary in their vulnerability for emotional distress, warranting clinical attention. Future research should elucidate explanatory factors and opportunities for tailored interventions.

How to assess diabetes distress: comparison of the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID) and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS)

AIMS

To compare the properties of the two most commonly used assessment tools for diabetes distress, the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID) and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), in order to discriminate their psychometric capabilities and functions.

METHODS

Six hundred and twenty-eight people with diabetes (67% Type 1, 33% Type 2) were cross-sectionally assessed with the PAID, the DDS and further self-report scales regarding coping, quality of life, depressive symptoms and self-care, and medical data were gained. We analysed the PAID and DDS for areas of contentual/psychometric divergence in assessing diabetes distress and compared their associations with criteria of interest.

RESULTS

Content analysis: The PAID covers a greater variety of emotional concerns and shows a stronger focus on food-related problems and complications. The DDS is more reflective of physician-related distress and problems concerning diabetes self-management. Psychometric analysis: Exploratory factor analyses revealed four-factor structures of both scales, explaining 60% (PAID) and 67% (DDS) of variance. Confirmatory factor analyses confirmed that single-factor and four-factor models fit the data. Total scales proved high and subscales mostly satisfactory reliability. Associations with criteria of interest: The PAID was significantly more strongly associated with dysfunctional coping styles, quality of life and depressive symptoms. The DDS showed significantly stronger associations with diabetes self-care and metabolic outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our results support both PAID and DDS as good self-report measures of diabetes distress. The observed contentual/psychometric differences suggest that a justified choice with regard to the intended clinical or scientific purpose can improve the acquisition of the required data.

Effectiveness of tailored support for people with Type 2 diabetes after a first acute coronary event: a multicentre randomized controlled trial (the Diacourse-ACE study)

AIMS

To evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored, supportive intervention strategy in influencing diabetes-related distress, health status, well-being and clinical outcomes in people with Type 2 diabetes shortly after a first acute coronary event.

METHODS

People with Type 2 diabetes and a recent first acute coronary event (n = 201) were randomized to the intervention group (three home visits by a diabetes nurse) or the attention control group (one telephone consultation). Outcomes were measured after discharge (baseline) and at 5 months (follow-up) using validated questionnaires for diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes), well-being (WHO Well-Being Index) and health status (Euroqol 5 Dimensions; Euroqol Visual Analogue Scale). ancova was used to analyse change-over-time differences between groups.

RESULTS

Follow-up data were available for 81 participants in the intervention group (66.0 ± 9.3 years, 76% male) and 80 in the control group (65.6 ± 9.4 years, 75% male) participants. Mean diabetes-related distress was low after hospital discharge (intervention group: 8.2 ± 10.1; control group: 9.2 ± 12.4) and did not change after 5 months (intervention group: 9.2 ± 12.4; control group: 9.0 ± 11.2). Baseline well-being was less favourable but improved significantly in the intervention group (baseline: 58.5 ± 28.0; follow-up: 65.5 ± 23.7; P = 0.005), but not in the control group (baseline: 57.5 ± 25.2; follow-up: 59.6 ± 24.4; P = 0.481). Health status also improved in the intervention group (baseline: 69.9 ± 17.3; follow-up: 76.8 ± 15.6; P < 0.001) but not in the control group (baseline: 68.6 ± 15.9; follow-up: 69.9 ± 16.7; P = 0.470). A significant group effect was found for health status (F = 7.9; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the intervention had no effect on diabetes-related distress, this might be at least partially attributable to very low levels of diabetes-related distress at baseline. Interestingly, health status scores and well-being, which were less favourable at baseline, both improved after the tailored support intervention.

Diabetes-Related Distress, Depression and Distress-Depression among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Malaysia

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) brings about an increasing psychosocial problem in adult patients. Prevalence data on and associated factors of diabetes related distress (DRD) and depression have been lacking in Asia. This study aimed to examine the prevalence of DRD and depression, and their associated factors in Asian adult T2DM patients. This study was conducted in three public health clinics measuring DRD (Diabetes Distress Scale, DDS), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ). Patients who were at least 30 years of age, had T2DM for more than one year, with regular follow-up and recent laboratory results (< 3 months) were consecutively recruited. Associations between DRD, depression and the combination DRD-depression with demographic and clinical characteristics were analysed using generalized linear models. From 752 invited people, 700 participated (mean age 56.9 years, 52.8% female, 52.9% Malay, 79.1% married). Prevalence of DRD and depression were 49.2% and 41.7%, respectively. Distress and depression were correlated, spearman's r = 0.50. Patients with higher DRD were younger (OR 0.995, 95% CI 0.996 to 0.991), Chinese (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.29), attending Dengkil health clinic (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.22) and had higher scores on the PHQ (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06). Depression was less likely in the unmarried compared to divorced/separately living and those attending Dengkil health clinic, but more likely in patients with microvascular complications (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.73) and higher DDS (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.03). For the combination of DRD and depression, unemployment (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.02 to 21.20) had positive association, whereas those under medical care at the Salak health clinics (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.63), and those with a blood pressure > 130/80 mmHg (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.89) were less likely to experience both DRD and depression. DRD and depression were common and correlated in Asian adults with T2DM at primary care level. Socio-demographic more than clinical characteristics were related to DRD and depression.