Ragnhild Bjarkøy Strandberg1, Marit Graue2, Tore Wentzel-Larsen3, Mark Peyrot4, Berit Rokne5. 1. Centre for Evidence Based Practice, Bergen University College, Norway; Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Norway. Electronic address: rob@hib.no. 2. Centre for Evidence Based Practice, Bergen University College, Norway; Department of Paediatrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 3. Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway; Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Eastern and Southern Norway, Norway; Centre for Clinical Research, Haukeland University Hospital, Norway. 4. Department of Sociology, Loyola University MD, USA. 5. Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Norway; Department for Research and Development, Haukeland University Hospital, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Emotional problems are common in adults with diabetes, and knowledge about how different indicators of emotional problems are related with glycemic control is required. The aim was to examine the relationships of diabetes-specific emotional distress, depression, anxiety, and overall well-being with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). METHODS: Of the 319 adults with type 1 diabetes attending the endocrinology outpatient clinic at a university hospital in Norway, 235 (74%) completed the Diabetes Distress Scale, the Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index. Blood samples were taken at the time of data collection to determine HbA1c. Regression analyses examined associations of diabetes-specific emotional distress, anxiety, depression, and overall well-being with HbA1c. The relationship between diabetes-specific emotional distress and HbA1c was tested for nonlinearity. RESULTS: Diabetes-specific emotional distress was related to glycemic control (DDS total: unstandardized coefficient=0.038, P<.001; PAID total: coefficient=0.021, P=.007), but depression, anxiety, and overall well-being were not. On the DDS, only regimen-related distress was independently related to HbA1c (coefficient=0.056, P<.001). A difference of 0.5 standard deviation of baseline regimen distress is associated with a difference of 0.6 in HbA1c. No significant nonlinearity was detected in the relationship between diabetes-specific distress and HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: To stimulate adequate care strategies, health personnel should acknowledge depression and diabetes-specific emotional distress as different conditions in clinical consultations. Addressing diabetes-specific emotional distress, in particular regimen distress, in clinical consultation might improve glycemic control.
OBJECTIVE: Emotional problems are common in adults with diabetes, and knowledge about how different indicators of emotional problems are related with glycemic control is required. The aim was to examine the relationships of diabetes-specific emotional distress, depression, anxiety, and overall well-being with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). METHODS: Of the 319 adults with type 1 diabetes attending the endocrinology outpatient clinic at a university hospital in Norway, 235 (74%) completed the Diabetes Distress Scale, the Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index. Blood samples were taken at the time of data collection to determine HbA1c. Regression analyses examined associations of diabetes-specific emotional distress, anxiety, depression, and overall well-being with HbA1c. The relationship between diabetes-specific emotional distress and HbA1c was tested for nonlinearity. RESULTS:Diabetes-specific emotional distress was related to glycemic control (DDS total: unstandardized coefficient=0.038, P<.001; PAID total: coefficient=0.021, P=.007), but depression, anxiety, and overall well-being were not. On the DDS, only regimen-related distress was independently related to HbA1c (coefficient=0.056, P<.001). A difference of 0.5 standard deviation of baseline regimen distress is associated with a difference of 0.6 in HbA1c. No significant nonlinearity was detected in the relationship between diabetes-specific distress and HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: To stimulate adequate care strategies, health personnel should acknowledge depression and diabetes-specific emotional distress as different conditions in clinical consultations. Addressing diabetes-specific emotional distress, in particular regimen distress, in clinical consultation might improve glycemic control.
Authors: D M Hessler; L Fisher; W H Polonsky; U Masharani; L A Strycker; A L Peters; I Blumer; V Bowyer Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2017-06-18 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Hanna Kampling; Frank Petrak; Erik Farin; Bernd Kulzer; Stephan Herpertz; Oskar Mittag Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Eunjin Lee Tracy; Cynthia A Berg; Ashley C Baker; Daniel Mello; Michelle L Litchman; Deborah J Wiebe Journal: Child Health Care Date: 2018-10-22
Authors: Cheryl L P Vigen; Kristine Carandang; Jeanine Blanchard; Paola A Sequeira; Jamie R Wood; Donna Spruijt-Metz; Robin Whittemore; Anne L Peters; Elizabeth A Pyatak Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Rachel M Wasserman; Sahar S Eshtehardi; Barbara J Anderson; Jill A Weissberg-Benchell; Marisa E Hilliard Journal: Can J Diabetes Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 2.774