Rhonda J Winchester1, Joni S Williams2, Tamara E Wolfman3, Leonard E Egede4. 1. Center for Health Disparities Research, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, P.O. Box 250593, Charleston, SC USA 29425. Electronic address: runwithjane@gmail.com. 2. Center for Health Disparities Research, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, P.O. Box 250593, Charleston, SC USA 29425; Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, MSC 623, Charleston, SC USA 29425. Electronic address: stromjl@musc.edu. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, MSC 623, Charleston, SC USA 29425. Electronic address: wolfmant@musc.edu. 4. Center for Health Disparities Research, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Rutledge Avenue, P.O. Box 250593, Charleston, SC USA 29425; Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas Street, Suite 803, MSC 623, Charleston, SC USA 29425; Health Equity and Rural Outreach Innovation Center, Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, 109 Beet Street, Charleston, SC USA 29401. Electronic address: egedel@musc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor control and elevated depressive symptoms (EDS), serious psychological distress (SPD), and diabetes distress (DD) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of adults seen at an academic medical center and Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the southeastern US. Linear regression models were computed using CVD risk factors as clinically meaningful outcomes (glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c); systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure; and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)); EDS, SPD, and DD were primary independent variables. Covariates included sociodemographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 361 adults. Correlation analyses showed significant relationships between DD and HbA1c, DBP, and LDL-C. Adjusted linear regression models showed DD to be significantly associated with HbA1c and LDL-C, and SPD to be significantly associated only with LDL-C. In the fully adjusted model, DD remained significantly associated with HbA1c (β=4.349; 95% CI (-0.649, 2.222)). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of adults with T2DM, DD and SPD were significantly associated with CVD risk factors; however, after controlling for covariates, only DD was shown to be significantly associated with poor glycemic control. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Strategies are warranted to examine the relationship between DD and CVD risk factor control in patients with T2DM. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor control and elevated depressive symptoms (EDS), serious psychological distress (SPD), and diabetes distress (DD) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of adults seen at an academic medical center and Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the southeastern US. Linear regression models were computed using CVD risk factors as clinically meaningful outcomes (glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c); systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure; and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)); EDS, SPD, and DD were primary independent variables. Covariates included sociodemographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 361 adults. Correlation analyses showed significant relationships between DD and HbA1c, DBP, and LDL-C. Adjusted linear regression models showed DD to be significantly associated with HbA1c and LDL-C, and SPD to be significantly associated only with LDL-C. In the fully adjusted model, DD remained significantly associated with HbA1c (β=4.349; 95% CI (-0.649, 2.222)). CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of adults with T2DM, DD and SPD were significantly associated with CVD risk factors; however, after controlling for covariates, only DD was shown to be significantly associated with poor glycemic control. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Strategies are warranted to examine the relationship between DD and CVD risk factor control in patients with T2DM. Published by Elsevier Inc.
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: Mark Hamer; Emmanuel Stamatakis; Mika Kivimäki; Andre Pascal Kengne; G David Batty Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2010-09-30 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Lawrence Fisher; Russell E Glasgow; Joseph T Mullan; Marilyn M Skaff; William H Polonsky Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Kurt Kroenke; Tara W Strine; Robert L Spitzer; Janet B W Williams; Joyce T Berry; Ali H Mokdad Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2008-08-27 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Marcel C Adriaanse; Frans Pouwer; Jacqueline M Dekker; Giel Nijpels; Coen D Stehouwer; Robert J Heine; Frank J Snoek Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-08-26 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Aaron A Lee; Michele Heisler; Ranak Trivedi; D Scott Obrosky; Maria K Mor; John D Piette; Ann-Marie Rosland Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2021-10-04
Authors: Charlene C Quinn; Krystal K Swasey; J Christopher F Crabbe; Michelle D Shardell; Michael L Terrin; Erik A Barr; Ann L Gruber-Baldini Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Bustanul Arifin; Antoinette D I van Asselt; Didik Setiawan; Jarir Atthobari; Maarten J Postma; Qi Cao Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 2.655