Psychometric Properties of the Polish Version of the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS)

Diabetes distress and diabetes burnout explored in various areas of life in patients with type 1 diabetes: effect of short-term psychological intervention

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes distress (DD) and diabetes burnout (DB) are recognized psychological phenomena in patients with T1DM (type 1 diabetes mellitus). Still, there is an urgent need to create professional psychological intervention procedures to provide patients with adequate care.

AIM

The aim of the study was to assess the level of DD and DB in T1DM patients at baseline and after 5 of sessions psychological intervention in the group of participants who applied for help.

METHODS

34 T1DM patients who requested psychological support (22 females, 12 males) and 30 patients in a control group (14 females, 16 males) participated in the study. At baseline clinical test results between groups were compared. Next, in the studied group measurements were repeated after a set of five psychological face-to-face individual interventions which lasted 30-60 min each. They were support sessions with elements of cognitive-behavioral interventions done by clinical psychologists. Session 1: introduction, interview and collection of test results; session 2-4: work on the indicated by the patient and test results most problematic aspect of diabetes, session 5: a summary and plan for further treatment if needed. The control group results were obtained only at baseline. Research tools: DDS; PAID, Diabetes Burnout test by Polonsky.

RESULTS

At the baseline, significant differences were observed between the studied group and control group: in DB/DD levels: DB (3.9 ± 1.7 vs 2.4 ± 1.6; p < 0.001); DDS (3.2 ± 1.0 vs 2.7 ± 1.0; p = 0.064); PAID (62.3 ± 14.1vs 34.4 ± 21.0; p < 0.001). There were also group differences in HbA1c levels (8.7 ± 2.4 vs 7.3 ± 1.5; p = 0.028). After psychological interventions, there was a significant improvement in DB (3.9 ± 1.7vs 2.9 ± 1.2; p < 0.001; DDS (3.2 ± 1 vs 3.0 ± 0.7; p = 0.03); PAID (62.3 ± 14.1 vs 51.8 ± 12.5; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

DD and DB constitute a significant problem in the group of T1DM patients, but providing appropriate specialist care may help them accept diabetes and improve life satisfaction, as well as regain control over their diabetes management.

Diabetes distress in adult patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Background: Diabetes is a chronic and demanding condition, exposing patients to complex physical and mental challenges, and making them particularly vulnerable to distress. Diabetes distress related to disease in diabetic patients is a term encompassing challenges associated with the psychosocial adaptation required of these individuals. Aim of the study: To assess distress in patients with diabetes mellitus. Material and methods: This study was conducted among 107 patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus reporting for follow-up at a diabetes clinic. The Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) was used for data collection. Results: Moderate and severe diabetes distress was found in 36.4% and 15% of respondents in the study group, respectively. The total mean score for the DDS was 2.19. The largest percentages of respondents with high levels of distress were observed in patients with a financial situation rated lower than good (30.6%), those having less than secondary education (28.0%), and those under 30 years of age (27.8%). Patients with type 1 diabetes (26.9%), a disease duration > 30 years (30.8%), those using insulin pump therapy (30%) or CGM (Continuous Glucose Monitoring) and FGM (Flash Glucose Monitoring) systems (50%), and those showing ≥ 3 chronic diabetic complications (37.5%) experienced severe distress. Conclusions: Overall, diabetic patients showed a moderate level of distress. The greatest inconveniences caused by the disorder were associated with regimen-related distress and emotional burden. Rural patients with a lower level of education and a lower financial status showed higher levels of distress. Patients experiencing chronic complications from diabetes and those with higher levels of glycated hemoglobin also presented with more severe distress.

Patient-reported outcome measures for assessing health-related quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are important tools to assess outcomes relevant to patients, with Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQOL) as an important construct to be measured. Many different HRQOL PROMs are used in the type 2 diabetes field, however a complete overview of these PROMs is currently lacking. We therefore aimed to systematically describe and classify the content of all PROMs that have specifically been developed or validated to measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE until 31 December 2021. Studies on the development or validation of a PROM measuring HRQOL, or aspects of HRQOL, in people with type 2 diabetes were included. Title and abstract and full-text screening were conducted by two independent researchers and data extraction was performed independently by one of the researchers. Data were extracted on language in which the PROM was developed, target population, construct(s) being measured, names of (sub)scales and number of items per (sub)scale. In addition, all PROMs and subscales were classified according to specific aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model (symptom status, functional status, general health perceptions) to aid researchers in PROM selection. In total 220 studies were identified that developed or validated PROMs that measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 116 unique HRQOL PROMs, 91 (of the subscales) measured symptom status, 60 measured functional status and 26 measured general health perceptions. In addition, 16 of the PROMs (subscales) measured global quality of life. 61 of the 116 PROMs (subscales) also include characteristics of the individual (e.g. aspects of personality, coping) or environment (e.g. social or financial support) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs, e.g. measure of a patient's perception of their personal experience of the healthcare they have received, e.g. treatment satisfaction), which are not part of the HRQOL construct. Only 9 of the 116 PROMs measure all aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model. Finally, 8 of the 116 PROMs stating to measure HRQOL, measured no HRQOL construct. In conclusion, a large number of PROMs are available for people with type 2 diabetes, which intend to measure (aspects of) HRQOL. These PROMs measure a large variety of (sub)constructs, which are not all HRQOL constructs, with a small amount of PROMs not measuring HRQOL at all. There is a need for consensus on which aspects of HRQOL should be measured in people with type 2 diabetes and which PROMs to use in research and daily practice. PROSPERO: CRD42017071012. COMET database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/956 .

Content Validity of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Developed for Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aimed to systematically evaluate the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) specifically developed to measure (aspects of) health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people with type 2 diabetes. A systematic review was performed in PubMed and Embase of PROMs measuring perceived symptoms, physical function, mental function, social function/participation, and general health perceptions, and that were validated to at least some extent. Content validity (relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility) was evaluated using COSMIN methodology.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 54 (different versions of) PROMs, containing 150 subscales. We found evidence for sufficient content validity for only 41/150 (27%) (subscales of) PROMs. The quality of evidence was generally very low. We found 66 out of 150 (44%) (subscales of) PROMs with evidence for either insufficient relevance, insufficient comprehensiveness, or insufficient comprehensibility. For measuring diabetes-specific symptoms, physical function, mental function, social function/participation, and general health perceptions, we identified one to 11 (subscales of) PROMs with sufficient content validity, although quality of the evidence was generally low. For measuring depressive symptoms, no PROM with sufficient content validity was identified. For each aspect of HRQL, we found at least one PROM with sufficient content validity, except for depressive symptoms. The quality of the evidence was mostly very low.

Psychometric validation of diabetes distress scale in Bangladeshi population

Diabetes Distress (DD)-an emotional or affective state arise from challenge of living with diabetes and the burden of self-care-negatively impact diabetes management and quality of life of T2DM patients. Early detection and management of DD is key to efficient T2DM management. The study aimed at developing a valid and reliable instrument for Bangladeshi patients as unavailability such a tool posing challenge in diabetes care. Linguistically adapted, widely used, 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), developed through forward-backward translation from English to Bengali, was administered on 1184 T2DM patients, from four diabetes hospitals in Bangladesh. Psychometric assessment of the instrument included, construct validity using principal component factor analysis, internal consistency using Cronbach's α and discriminative validity through independent t-test and test-retest reliability using intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) and Kappa statistics. Factor analysis extracted 4 components similar to original DDS domains, confirms the construct validity. The scale demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency (α = 0.838), stability (test-retest ICC = 0.941) and good agreement across repeated measurements (Kappa = 0.584). Discriminative validity revealed that patients with complication (p < 0.001) and those are on insulin (p < 0.001) had significantly higher distress scores in all domains. Bengali version of DDS is a valid and reliable tool for assessing distress among Bangladeshi T2DM patients.