Aims The second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study aimed to assess psychosocial outcomes in people with diabetes across countries for benchmarking.Methods Surveys included new and adapted questions from validated questionnaires that assess health-related quality of life, self-management, attitudes/beliefs, social support and priorities for improving diabetes care. Questionnaires were conducted online, by telephone or in person.Results Participants were 8596 adults with diabetes across 17 countries. There were significant between-country differences for all benchmarking indicators; no one country's outcomes were consistently better or worse than others. The proportion with likely depression [WHO-5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5) score ≤ 28] was 13.8% (country range 6.5-24.1%). Diabetes-related distress [Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale 5 (PAID-5) score ≥ 40] was reported by 44.6% of participants (17.2-67.6%). Overall quality of life was rated 'poor' or 'very poor' by 12.2% of participants (7.6-26.1%). Diabetes had a negative impact on all aspects investigated, ranging from 20.5% on relationship with family/friends to 62.2% on physical health. Approximately 40% of participants (18.6-64.9%) reported that their medication interfered with their ability to live a normal life. The availability of person-centred chronic illness care and support for active involvement was rated as low. Following self-care advice for medication and diet was most common, and least common for glucose monitoring and foot examination, with marked country variation. Only 48.8% of respondents had participated in diabetes educational programmes/activities to help manage their diabetes.Conclusions Cross-national benchmarking using psychometrically validated indicators can help identify areas for improvement and best practices to drive changes that improve outcomes for people with diabetes.
Aims/hypothesis We wanted to identify a five-item short form of the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale and a single-item measure for rapid screening of diabetes-related emotional distress. Methods Using an existing database of 1,153 patients with diabetes, we conducted a principal-components analysis to identify a set of five items and then conducted a reliability analysis and validity checks. From those five items, we identified the item with the strongest psychometric properties as a one-item screening tool. Results We identified a reliable and valid short version of the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID) comprising five of the emotional-distress questions of the full PAID items (PAID-5, with items 3, 6, 12, 16, 19). The PAID-5 has satisfactory sensitivity (94%) and specificity (89%) for recognition of diabetes-related emotional distress. We also identified a one-item screening tool, the PAID-1 (Question 12: Worrying about the future and the possibility of serious complications), which has concurrent sensitivity and specificity of about 80% for the recognition of diabetes-related emotional distress. Conclusions/interpretation The PAID-5 and PAID-1 appear to be psychometrically robust short-form measures of diabetes-related emotional distress.Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
To conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of longitudinal studies assessing the bi‐directional association between depression and diabetes macrovascular and microvascular complications. Embase, Medline and PsycINFO databases were searched from inception through 27 November 2017. A total of 4592 abstracts were screened for eligibility. Meta‐analyses used multilevel random/mixed‐effects models. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa scale. Twenty‐two studies were included in the systematic review. Sixteen studies examined the relationship between baseline depression and incident diabetes complications, of which nine studies involving over one million participants were suitable for meta‐analysis. Depression was associated with an increased risk of incident macrovascular (HR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.30–1.47) and microvascular disease (HR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.25–1.41). Six studies examined the association between baseline diabetes complications and subsequent depression, of which two studies involving over 230 000 participants were suitable for meta‐analysis. The results showed that diabetes complications increased the risk of incident depressive disorder (HR = 1.14; 95% CI: 1.07–1.21). The quality analysis showed increased risk of bias notably in the representativeness of selected cohorts and ascertainment of exposure and outcome. Depression in people with diabetes is associated with an increased risk of incident macrovascular and microvascular complications. The relationship between depression and diabetes complications appears bi‐directional. However, the risk of developing diabetes complications in depressed people is higher than the risk of developing depression in people with diabetes complications. The underlying mechanisms warrant further research.
OBJECTIVETo test the feasibility and impact of implementing the computer-assisted Monitoring of Individual Needs in Diabetes (MIND) procedure, which is aimed at improving recognition and management of the psychological needs of diabetic patients in routine care.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThe MIND study was implemented in diabetes clinics across eight countries as part of the annual review. The computerized assessment covered emotional well-being (World Health Organization 5 Well-Being Index), diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes), life events, and the patient’s agenda. Medical data were retrieved from the charts, and agreed-upon actions were recorded.RESULTSOf 1,567 patients monitored using the MIND, 24.9% had either likely depression or high diabetes-related distress; 5.4% had both. Over 80% of these patients were newly identified cases, and 41% of patients with depression were referred to a mental health professional.CONCLUSIONSMonitoring of well-being and diabetes-related distress as part of routine diabetes care is feasible and helps to identify and discuss unmet psychosocial needs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.