Hanjong Park1, Chang Park2, Laurie Quinn3, Cynthia Fritschi3. 1. College of Nursing Science, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Health Systems Science, University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Nursing Chicago, Illinois, USA. 3. Department of Biobehavioral Health Science, University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Nursing, Illinois, USA.
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating influence of diabetes health characteristics (diabetes distress, depression symptoms and diabetes symptoms) on the relationship between glucose control and fatigue in adults with type 2 diabetes. BACKGROUND: In patients with type 2 diabetes, fatigue is common and can affect diabetes self-management behaviours. Although long thought to result from hyperglycaemia, little evidence supports a relationship between fatigue and glucose control. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, descriptive study design was used. METHOD: Data were combined from two studies conducted at a large urban university in the Midwestern United States, resulting in a total sample of 155 urban-dwelling adults with type 2 diabetes. Data were collected over the course of 6 days from 2013-March 2014. Fatigue and related biological and psychological phenomena were measured to perform path analyses using structural equation modelling methods. The STATA software was used to analyse the data. FINDINGS: In patients with A1C less than or equal to 7%, fatigue was related to diabetes distress and diabetes symptoms, but not to A1C directly or indirectly. In the group with A1C greater than 7%, fatigue was indirectly related to A1C; this relationship was mediated through diabetes symptoms, depression and diabetes distress. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that fatigue is indirectly related to glucose control, but only in patients who have elevated A1C levels. In those with adequate glucose control, fatigue is mainly influenced by the presence of diabetes symptoms and distress. In both groups, the number and severity of diabetes symptoms were the strongest predictors of fatigue, regardless of blood glucose control.
AIM: The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating influence of diabetes health characteristics (diabetes distress, depression symptoms and diabetes symptoms) on the relationship between glucose control and fatigue in adults with type 2 diabetes. BACKGROUND: In patients with type 2 diabetes, fatigue is common and can affect diabetes self-management behaviours. Although long thought to result from hyperglycaemia, little evidence supports a relationship between fatigue and glucose control. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, descriptive study design was used. METHOD: Data were combined from two studies conducted at a large urban university in the Midwestern United States, resulting in a total sample of 155 urban-dwelling adults with type 2 diabetes. Data were collected over the course of 6 days from 2013-March 2014. Fatigue and related biological and psychological phenomena were measured to perform path analyses using structural equation modelling methods. The STATA software was used to analyse the data. FINDINGS: In patients with A1C less than or equal to 7%, fatigue was related to diabetes distress and diabetes symptoms, but not to A1C directly or indirectly. In the group with A1C greater than 7%, fatigue was indirectly related to A1C; this relationship was mediated through diabetes symptoms, depression and diabetes distress. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that fatigue is indirectly related to glucose control, but only in patients who have elevated A1C levels. In those with adequate glucose control, fatigue is mainly influenced by the presence of diabetes symptoms and distress. In both groups, the number and severity of diabetes symptoms were the strongest predictors of fatigue, regardless of blood glucose control.
Authors: William H Polonsky; Lawrence Fisher; Jay Earles; R James Dudl; Joel Lees; Joseph Mullan; Richard A Jackson Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Rebecca L Sudore; Andrew J Karter; Elbert S Huang; Howard H Moffet; Neda Laiteerapong; Yael Schenker; Alyce Adams; Rachel A Whitmer; Jennifer Y Liu; Yinghui Miao; Priya M John; Dean Schillinger Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Danielle Hessler; Lawrence Fisher; Russell E Glasgow; Lisa A Strycker; L Miriam Dickinson; Patricia A Arean; Umesh Masharani Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Susan Storey; Andrea Cohee; Wambui G Gathirua-Mwangi; Eric Vachon; Patrick Monahan; Julie Otte; Timothy E Stump; David Cella; Victoria Champion Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 2.172