Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review

Nature of the evidence base and approaches to guide nutrition interventions for individuals: a position paper from the Academy of Nutrition Sciences

This Position Paper from the Academy of Nutrition Sciences is the third in a series which describe the nature of the scientific evidence and frameworks that underpin nutrition recommendations for health. This paper focuses on evidence which guides the application of dietary recommendations for individuals. In some situations, modified nutrient intake becomes essential to prevent deficiency, optimise development and health, or manage symptoms and disease progression. Disease and its treatment can also affect taste, appetite and ability to access and prepare foods, with associated financial impacts. Therefore, the practice of nutrition and dietetics must integrate and apply the sciences of food, nutrition, biology, physiology, behaviour, management, communication and society to achieve and maintain human health. Thus, there is huge complexity in delivering evidence-based nutrition interventions to individuals. This paper examines available frameworks for appraising the quality and certainty of nutrition research evidence, the development nutrition practice guidelines to support evidence implementation in practice and the influence of other sources of nutrition information and misinformation. The paper also considers major challenges in applying research evidence to an individual and suggests consensus recommendations to begin to address these challenges in the future. Our recommendations target three groups; those who deliver nutrition interventions to individuals, those funding, commissioning or undertaking research aimed at delivering evidence-based nutrition practice, and those disseminating nutritional information to individuals.

Efficacy of a Digital Diabetes Logbook for People With Type 1, Type 2, and Gestational Diabetes: Results From a Multicenter, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In a randomized controlled trial, the efficacy of a digital diabetes diary regarding a reduction of diabetes distress was evaluated.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with a 12-week follow-up was conducted in 41 study sites across Germany. Key eligibility criteria were a diagnosis of type 1, type 2, or gestational diabetes and regular self-monitoring of blood glucose. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to either use the digital diabetes logbook (mySugr PRO), or to the control group without app use. The primary outcome was the reduction in diabetes distress at the 12-week follow-up. All analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population with all randomized participants. The trial was registered at the German Register for Clinical Studies (DRKS00022923).

RESULTS

Between February 11, 2021, and June 24, 2022, 424 participants (50% female, 50% male) were included, with 282 being randomized to the intervention group (66.5%) and 142 to the control group (33.5%). A total of 397 participants completed the trial (drop-out rate: 6.4%). The median reduction in diabetes distress was 2.41 (interquartile range [IQR]: -2.50 to 8.11) in the intervention group and 1.25 (IQR: -5.00 to 7.50) in the control group. The model-based adjusted between-group difference was significant (-2.20, IQR: -4.02 to -0.38, P = .0182) favoring the intervention group. There were 27 adverse events, 17 (6.0%) in the intervention group, and 10 (7.0%) in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of the digital diabetes logbook was demonstrated regarding improvements in mental health in people with type 1, type 2, and gestational diabetes.

Exploring treatment burden in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a thematic analysis in china's primary care settings

BACKGROUND

Understanding treatment burden is a critical element to the effective management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). The current study aims to address the knowledge gap surrounding treatment burden of T2DM from the patient's perspective in China's primary care settings.

METHODS

A narrative review informed the creation of an a priori coding structure to identify aspects of T2DM treatment burden. Focus groups were conducted, employing a maximum variation sampling strategy to select participants from diverse sociodemographic backgrounds across urban, suburban, rural, and remote areas in China. Participants included adults with T2DM care in primary care settings for over a year and a Treatment Burden Questionnaire score of 25 or higher. Deductive thematic analysis, guided by the coding structure, facilitated a comprehensive exploration and further development of the conceptual framework of T2DM treatment burden.

RESULTS

Four focus groups, each comprising five participants from diverse areas, were conducted. Utilising the Cumulative Complexity Model and Normalisation Process Theory as theoretical underpinnings, the thematic analysis refined the conceptual framework based on the coding structure from the narrative review. Five key themes were refined, encompassing medical information, medication, administration, healthcare system, and lifestyle. Additionally, the financial and time/travel themes merged into a new theme termed "personal resources", illustrating their overlapping within the framework. Participants in these focus groups highlighted challenges in managing medical information, an aspect often underrepresented in prior treatment burden research. The thematic analysis culminated in a finalised conceptual framework, offering a comprehensive understanding of the treatment burden experiences of people with T2DM in China's primary care settings. This framework includes six key constructs, delineating T2DM treatment burden and associated factors, such as antecedents and consequences.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insights into the treatment burden of T2DM. A conceptual framework was finalised to deepen the understanding of the multifaceted constructs and the nature of treatment burden in people with T2DM. Furthermore, it emphasises the need to tailor T2DM treatment to individual capacities, considering their personal resource allocation and treatment utilisation.

Person-reported outcomes in diabetes care: What are they and why are they so important?

In this review, we aim to show how person-reported outcomes (PROs) and person-reported experiences (PREs) can significantly contribute to the way diabetes care is delivered, the involvement of people with diabetes in diabetes care, and the collaboration between health care professionals and people with diabetes. This review focuses on the definition and measurement of PROs and PREs, the importance of PROs and PREs for person-centred diabetes care, and integrating the perspectives of people with diabetes in the evaluation of medical, psychological and technological interventions. PROs have been increasingly accepted by Health Technology Assessment bodies and are therefore valued in the context of reimbursement decisions and consequently by regulators and other health care stakeholders for the allocation of health care resources. Furthermore, the review identified current challenges to the assessment and use of PROs and PREs in clinical care and research. These challenges relate to the combination of questionnaires and ecological momentary assessment for measuring PROs and PREs, lack of consensus on a core outcome set, limited sensitivity to change within many measures and insufficient standardization of what can be considered a minimal clinically important difference. Another issue that has not been sufficiently addressed is the involvement of people with diabetes in the design and development of measures to assess PROs and PREs.

Validation of the Chinese version of the diabetes health profile to predict the impact of mobile health education on quality of life in type 2 diabetes patients

Purpose

The Diabetes Health Profile (DHP18), initially created in the United Kingdom, currently lacks a Chinese version. This study endeavors to authenticate the Chinese adaptation of the DHP18 and assess the influence of mobile health (mHealth) education intervention on the quality of life of individuals living with diabetes.

Patients and methods

The study included 470 Type 2 diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients (204 men, 266 women), spanning an age range of 19-79 years, with an average age of 54 ± 12.40 years. Data analysis employed Jamovie and Mplus software. Moreover, test-retest reliability was evaluated in 52 hospitalized T2DM patients through two repeated measurements taken 4 weeks apart.

Results

The Chinese version DHP18 scale exhibited high reliability, evidenced by a Cronbach's alpha of 0.88, and coefficient of test-retest reliability of 0.84. Individual subscales also demonstrated strong reliability, ranging from 0.76 to 0.84, with test-retest reliability spanning from 0.71 to 0.74. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) employing a three-factor structure (χ2 = 294.69, GFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.05, SRMR = 0.06) validated the scale's construct validity. Notably, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in the quality of life between Type 2 diabetes patients using mHealth education intervention and those without mHealth education intervention. Mediation analysis revealed that Appraisal of Diabetes (ADS) and Self-Management Efficacy (SED) mediated the effects of Psychological Distress (PD) and Behavior Adherence (BA) on quality of life, both significant direct and indirect effects (p < 0.001). In addition, Dietary Abstinence (DE) displayed significant overall impact (β = -0.13, p < 0.001) and indirect influence (β = -0.10, p < 0.01) on diabetic patients' quality of life, though lacking a significant direct effect (β = -0.03, p = 0.38).

Conclusion

The Chinese version of the Diabetes Health Profile Scale meets stringent psychometric standards and stands as an appropriate measurement tool for Chinese T2DM patients, maintaining comparable results to the original scale's structure. The mHealth education intervention yielded a notably positive impact on the quality of life among T2DM patients. Mediation analysis revealed that the three dimensions of the DHP were mediated by Appraisal of Diabetes and Diabetes Self-Management Efficacy, partially mediated by Psychological Distress and Behavior Adherence, and fully mediated by Dietary Abstinence, providing insight into the positive effects of the mHealth model on the quality of life of diabetic patients.

Socioeconomic inequalities in health-related functioning among people with type 2 Diabetes: longitudinal analyses in the Maastricht Study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a common chronic disease that disproportionally affects disadvantaged groups. People with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) have increased risk of T2DM and people with a low SEP and T2DM have higher HbA1c-levels compared to people with T2DM and high SEP. The aim of this study is to analyze longitudinal socioeconomic differences in health-related functioning in people with T2DM.

METHODS

Longitudinal data from 1,537 participants of The Maastricht Study with T2DM were used (32.6% female, mean (SD) age 62.9 (7.7) years). SEP was determined by baseline measures of education, occupation and income. Health-related functioning (physical, mental and social) was measured with the Short-Form Health Survey and the Impact on Participation and Autonomy survey (all scored from 0 to 100). Associations of SEP and health-related functioning were studied annually over a 10-year period (median (IQR) 7.0 (5.0) years, baseline 2010-2018) using linear mixed methods adjusting for demographics, HbA1c-levels and lifestyle factors.

RESULTS

Participants with a low SEP had significantly worse health-related functioning compared to those with a high SEP. For example, participants with low income had lower scores for physical (-4.49[CI -5.77;-3.21]), mental (-2.61[-3.78,-1.44]) and social functioning (-9.76[-12.30;-7.23]) compared to participants with high income on a scale from 0 to 100. In addition, participants with a low education significantly declined more over time in mental (score for interaction education with time - 0.23[-0.37;-0.09]) and social functioning (-0.44[-0.77;-0.11]) compared to participants with high education. Participants with low and intermediate incomes significantly declined more over time in physical functioning (-0.17 [-0.34, -0.01 and - 0.18 [-0.36, 0.00]) compared to participants with high income.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with T2DM, those with a lower SEP had worse health-related functioning in general than people with a higher SEP. Additionally, people with T2DM and low education developed poorer mental and social functioning over time compared to people with T2DM and high education. People with T2DM and low or intermediate income declined more in physical functioning over time than those with high incomes. In addition to HbA1c-levels and lifestyle patterns, more attention is needed for socioeconomic differences in health-related functioning for people living with T2DM.

Quality of measurement properties of medication adherence instruments in cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence has a major impact on reducing mortality and healthcare costs related to the treatment of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus. Selecting the best patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) among the many available for this kind of patient is extremely important. This study aims to critically assess, compare and synthesize the quality of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures to assess medication adherence among patients with cardiovascular diseases and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This review followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The searches were performed in Web of Science, SCOPUS, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, and ProQuest (gray literature).

RESULTS

A total of 110 records encompassing 27 different PROMs were included in the review. The included records were published between 1986 and 2023, most of which reported studies conducted in the United States and were published in English. None of the PROMs were classified in the category "a", thus being recommended for use due to the quality of its measurement properties. The PROMs that should not be recommended for use (category "c") are the MTA, GMAS, DMAS-7, MALMAS, ARMS-D, and 5-item questionnaire. The remaining PROMs, e.g., MMAS-8, SMAQ, MEDS, MNPS, ARMS-12, MGT, MTA-OA, MTA-Insulin, LMAS-14, MARS-5, A-14, ARMS-10, IADMAS, MAQ, MMAS-5, ProMAS, ARMS-7, 3-item questionnaire, AS, 12-item questionnaire, and Mascard were considered as having the potential to be recommended for use (category "b").

CONCLUSION

None of the included PROMs met the criteria for being classified as trusted and recommended for use for patients with cardiovascular diseases and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, 21 PROMs have the potential to be recommended for use, but further studies are needed to ensure their quality based on the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019129109.

Current evidence for designing self-management support for underserved populations: an integrative review using the example of diabetes

AIMS

With numerous and continuing attempts at adapting diabetes self-management support programmes to better account for underserved populations, its important that the lessons being learned are understood and shared. The work we present here reviews the latest evidence and best practice in designing and embedding culturally and socially sensitive, self-management support programmes.

METHODS

We explored the literature with regard to four key design considerations of diabetes self-management support programmes: Composition - the design and content of written materials and digital tools and interfaces; Structure - the combination of individual and group sessions, their frequency, and the overall duration of programmes; Facilitators - the combination of individuals used to deliver the programme; and Context - the influence and mitigation of a range of individual, socio-cultural, and environmental factors.

RESULTS

We found useful and recent examples of design innovation within a variety of countries and models of health care delivery including Brazil, Mexico, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Within Composition we confirmed the importance of retaining best practice in creating readily understood written information and intuitive digital interfaces; Structure the need to offer group, individual, and remote learning options in programmes of flexible duration and frequency; Facilitators where the benefits of using culturally concordant peers and community-based providers were described; and finally in Context the need to integrate self-management support programmes within existing health systems, and tailor their various constituent elements according to the language, resources, and beliefs of individuals and their communities.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of design principles across the four design considerations were identified that together offer a promising means of creating the next generation of self-management support programme more readily accessible for underserved communities. Ultimately, we recommend that the precise configuration should be co-produced by all relevant service and patient stakeholders and its delivery embedded in local health systems.

The relationship between psychological resilience and depression among the diabetes patients under the background of "dynamic zero COVID-19": the mediating role of stigma and the moderating role of medication burden

Objective

Depression in diabetes patients is caused by their own disease or the surrounding social environment. How to cope with changes in mentality and adjust psychological stress responses, especially under China's dynamic zero COVID-19 policy, is worth further discussion. The researchers constructed a moderated mediation model to test the effect of psychological resilience during dynamic zero COVID-19 on depression in diabetes patients and the mediating role of stigma and the moderating effect of medication burden.

Method

From June to September, 2022, data were collected in Jinghu District, Wuhu City, Anhui Province, by multi-stage stratified sampling. Firstly, we selected a tertiary hospital randomly in Jinghu District. Secondly, departments are randomly chosen from the hospital. Finally, we set up survey points in each department and randomly select diabetes patients. In addition, we used the Connor-Davidson Elasticity Scale (CD-RISC) to measure psychological resilience of patients, and used the Stigma Scale for Chronic Illness (SSCI) to measure stigma, medication burden was measured by the Diabetes Treatment Burden Scale (DTBQ), and depression was assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). We used SPSS (version 23.0) and PROCESS (version 4.1) for data analysis.

Results

(1) Psychological resilience was negatively correlated with stigma, medication burden, and depression. Stigma was positively associated with medication burden and depression. Medication burden and depression are positively correlated, (2) The mediation analysis showed that psychological resilience had a direct predictive effect on depression, and stigma partially mediated the relationship, and (3) Medication burden moderates the direct pathway by which psychological resilience predicts depression; Medication burden moderates the first half of "psychological resilience → stigma → depression."

Conclusion

Under the mediating effect of stigma, psychological resilience can improve depression. Medication burden has a moderating effect on the relationship between psychological resilience and depression, and it also has a moderating effect on the relationship between psychological resilience and stigma. These results facilitate the understanding of the relationship mechanisms between psychological resilience and depression.

Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

What is important for people with type 2 diabetes? A focus group study to identify relevant aspects for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in diabetes care

Background

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) aim to evaluate the quality of care based on the perspectives of patients rather than clinical indicators. Qualitative research is needed to identify these perspectives in people with type 2 diabetes.

Objective

To identify, for the first time in Israel, aspects valuable for people with type 2 diabetes that can be relevant for PROMs in diabetes care.

Methods

A qualitative study included three focus groups totalling 19 people with type 2 diabetes. Inclusion criteria were: (1)type 2 diabetes, (2)diabetes duration of at least six months, and (3)adults aged 45–80 years. Purposive sampling enabled recruitment of heterogeneous participants. Also, two experts’ panels with healthcare providers involved in diabetes care (n = 23) were conducted to provide triangulation of information (more testimony about what is valuable for people with type 2 diabetes). Discussions were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed.

Results

Four domains were deemed valuable for people with type 2 diabetes: (1)challenges of living with diabetes, including reduced physical function, healthy lifestyle struggles, sexual dysfunction, and financial burden, (2)mental health issues, including depression, distress, anxiety, frustration, and loneliness, (3)self-management ability, including management of lifestyle modifications and treatment, knowledge about the disease and treatment, and (4)patient-clinician relationships, including the devotion of clinicians, trust in clinicians and treatment, shared decision-making, and multidisciplinary care under one roof. Experts favour using PROMs in diabetes routine care and even acknowledged their necessity to improve the treatment process. However, only some of the domains raised by people with type 2 diabetes were identified by the experts.

Conclusions

There are content gaps between perspectives of people with type 2 diabetes and their healthcare providers. PROMs are essential in addressing issues largely not addressed in routine diabetes care. We recommend that researchers and healthcare providers, who intend to utilize PROMs for diabetes care, consider the aforementioned domains.

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.

Systematic review on the measurement properties of diabetes-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for measuring physical functioning in people with type 2 diabetes

We aimed to systematically assess the measurement properties of diabetes-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for measuring physical functioning, one of the core outcomes, in adults with type 2 diabetes.We performed a systematic literature search for PROMs or subscales measuring physical function that were validated to at least some extent in EMBASE and MEDLINE. Measurement properties were evaluated according to the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs.In total 21 articles were included, describing 12 versions of 7 unique diabetes-specific PROMs or subscales measuring physical functioning. In general, there were few high-quality studies on measurement properties of PROMs measuring physical functioning in adults with type 2 diabetes. The Dependence/Daily Life subscale of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale-Short Form (DFS-SF) and the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (IWADL) were most extensively evaluated. Both had sufficient ratings for aspects of content validity, although with mostly very low-quality evidence. Sufficient ratings for structural validity, internal consistency, and reliability were also found for both instruments, but responsiveness was rated inconsistent for both instruments. The other PROMs or subscales often had insufficient aspects of content validity, or their unidimensionality could not be confirmed.This systematic review showed that the Dependence/Daily Life subscale of the DFS-SF and the IWADL could be used to measure physical functioning in people with type 2 diabetes in research or clinical practice, while keeping the limitations of these instruments in mind. The measurement properties that have not been evaluated extensively for these PROMs should be evaluated in future studies.The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database, number CRD42021234890.

Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting in trials of diabetes in pregnancy: A systematic review

AIMS

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are reports of the patient's health status that come directly from the patient without interpretation by the clinician or anyone else. They are increasingly used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In this systematic review we identified RCTs conducted in women with diabetes in pregnancy which included PROs in their primary or secondary outcomes. We then evaluated the quality of PRO reporting against an internationally accepted reporting framework (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT-PRO) guidelines).

METHODS

We searched online databases for studies published 2013-2021 using a combination of keywords. Two authors reviewed all abstracts independently. Data on study characteristics and the quality of PRO reporting were extracted from relevant studies. We conducted a multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with high quality reporting.

RESULTS

We identified 7122 citations. Thirty-five articles were included for review. Only 17% of RCTs included a PRO as a primary or secondary outcome. Out of a maximum score of 100 the median score was 46, indicating sub-optimal reporting. A multiple regression analysis did not reveal any factors associated with high quality reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers should be mindful of the importance of PRO inclusion and reporting and include reliable PROs in trials.

Effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress on clinical outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the effect of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) routinely to assess and address depressive symptoms and diabetes distress among adults with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

A systematic review of published peer-reviewed studies.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies including adults with type 2 diabetes, published in English, from the inception of the databases to 24 February 2022 inclusive; and where the intervention included completion of a PROM of depressive symptoms and/or diabetes distress, with feedback of the responses to a healthcare professional.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Using Covidence software, screening and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently with any disagreements resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

The search identified 4512 citations, of which 163 full-text citations were assessed for eligibility, and nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies involved assessment of depressive symptoms only, two studies assessed diabetes distress only, and two studies assessed both. All studies had an associated cointervention. When depressive symptoms were assessed (n=7), a statistically significant between-group difference in depressive symptoms was observed in five studies; with a clinically significant (>0.5%) between-group difference in HbA1c in two studies. When diabetes distress was assessed (n=4), one study demonstrated statistically significant difference in depressive symptoms and diabetes distress; with a clinically significant between-group difference in HbA1c observed in two studies.

CONCLUSION

Studies are sparse in which PROMs are used to assess and address depressive symptoms or diabetes distress during routine clinical care of adults with type 2 diabetes. Further research is warranted to understand how to integrate PROMs into clinical care efficiently and determine appropriate interventions to manage identified problem areas.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020200246.

Using mHealth applications for self-care - An integrative review on perceptions among adults with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Individually designed interventions delivered through mobile health applications (mHealth apps) may be able to effectively support diabetes self-care. Our aim was to review and synthesize available evidence in the literature regarding perception of adults with type 1 diabetes on the features of mHealth apps that help promote diabetes self-care, as well as facilitators and barriers to their use. An additional aim was to review literature on changes in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the same population while using mHealth apps for diabetes self-care.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative studies focusing on adults aged 18 years and over with type 1 diabetes in any context were included. A systematic literature search using selected databases was conducted. Data was synthesised using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

We found that features of mHealth apps designed to help promote and maintain diabetes self-care could be categorized into self-care data monitoring, app display, feedback & reminders, data entry, data sharing, and additional features. Factors affecting the use of mHealth apps reported in the literature were personal factors, app design or usability factors, privacy and safety factors, or socioeconomic factors. Quality of life and diabetes distress were the most commonly reported PROMs in the included studies.

CONCLUSION

We are unable to reach a conclusive result due to the heterogeneity of the included studies as well as the limited number of studies reporting on these areas among adults with type 1 diabetes. We therefore recommend further large-scale studies looking into these areas that can ultimately improve mHealth app use in type 1 diabetes self-care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Prospero CRD42020157620 .

Challenges in Measuring What Matters to Patients With Diabetes. Comment on "Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review"

Collapse

A Self-Report Measure of Diabetes Self-Management for Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: The Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire-Revised (DSMQ-R) – Clinimetric Evidence From Five Studies

Aims

Measurement tools to evaluate self-management behavior are useful for diabetes research and clinical practice. The Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ) was introduced in 2013 and has become a widely used tool. This article presents a revised and updated version, DSMQ-R, and evaluates its properties in assessing self-management practices in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Methods

The DSMQ-R is a multidimensional questionnaire with 27 items regarding essential self-management practices for T1D and T2D (including diabetes-adjusted eating, glucose testing/monitoring, medication taking, physical activity and cooperation with the diabetes team). For the revised form, the original items were partially amended and the wording was updated; eleven items were newly added. The tool was applied as part of health-related surveys in five clinical studies (two cross-sectional, three prospective) including a total of 1,447 people with T1D and T2D. Using this data base, clinimetric properties were rigorously tested.

Results

The analyses showed high internal and retest reliability coefficients for the total scale and moderate to high coefficients for the subscales. Reliability coefficients for scales including the new items were consistently higher. Correlations with convergent criteria and related variables supported validity. Responsiveness was supported by significant short to medium term changes in prospective studies. Significant associations with glycemic outcomes were observed for DSMQ-R-assessed medication taking, glucose monitoring and eating behaviors.

Conclusions

The results support good clinimetric properties of the DSMQ-R. The tool can be useful for research and clinical practice and may facilitate the identification of improvable self-management practices in individuals.

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Non-adherence to medicines is estimated to cost billions to healthcare providers across the US and Europe each year. Addressing medication adherence (MA) can be challenging. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to collect self-reported data on MA, among other behaviours. Despite the myriad PROMs available and their widespread implementation in research, there is little commentary or standardization on the way they are reported, or their validity assessed. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of systematic reviews (SRs) that report PROMs of MA with a focus on type 2 diabetes to explore PROM reporting and validity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Web of Science. SRs reporting on PROMs related to MA behaviour in patients living with type 2 diabetes were included. Any SR published in English prior to December 2021 was included. Abstract and title screening were performed prior to full-text review by two independent researchers with discrepancies managed by a third. Protocols and SRs reporting on paediatric populations were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 19 eligible SRs that included 241 unique PROM studies were captured from the initial 2074 records that were identified. Data were captured across a 30-year scope, with roughly half (47.4%, n=9/19) of the SRs published in the last 5 years. In total, 104 unique PROMs were identified. Inclusion of non-validated PROMs was identified in 63.2% (n=12/19) of the included SRs, and reporting issues were identified in 47.3% of studies (n=114/241). A lower journal impact factor was significantly associated with a higher prevalence of validity issues (r=0.44, p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

There are a broad range of available PROMs; however, they have been reported inconsistently in the literature, often lacking significant evidence with respect to validity criteria. Standardization of reporting and assessments of validity may help to address this.