| Literature DB >> 30417151 |
E Hartill1, R B Gillis1, S Imran Jiwani1, N Recchia1, A Meal1, G G Adams1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypoglycemia unawareness (HU) has been attributed to both a downward shift in central nervous system (CNS)-triggered sympatho-adrenal responses to low glycaemic thresholds and a subsequent loss of adrenergic symptoms, which, in addition, to cerebral cortex adaptations permit normal function under hypoglycaemic conditions. Both of these mechanisms are brought about by recurring hypoglycemic events (hypoglycemia-associate autonomic failure, HAAF). This can contribute to repetitive cycles of increasingly severe hypoglycaemia, the consequences of which have considerable impact on relatives and significant others (SO) when providing care to patients with diabetes.Entities:
Keywords: Health profession; Medicine; Public health
Year: 2018 PMID: 30417151 PMCID: PMC6218670 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00887
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Characteristics of SR question using PICOS.
| 1-Population | Adult >18 Families* or carers looking after adult relatives with Hypoglycaemia Unawareness (HU) |
| 2-Intervention | ≥18 Adults with HU unawareness (Excluding elderly – over 65) |
| 3-Comparison | Experiences and views and subsequent support needs of significant others of adult relatives that have HU |
| 4-Outcomes | Health professionals interventions to address family support needs and improve overall HU care |
| 5-Study | Qualitative, Phenomenological studies, Grounded theory, Descriptive, Ethnography |
Studies included based on PICOS in order to gain understanding of their content.
| Study | Title | Participants | Phenomena of interest | Study Method | Study Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Stuckey, H., Mullan-Jensen,C., Kalra, S., Reading, J., Wens, J., Vallis, M., Kokoszka, A., Malek,R., Kovacs Burns, K., Piana, N., Skovlund,S. and Peyrot, M. ( | Living with an adult who has diabetes: Qualitative insights from the second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study | 2057 adult family members | Lived experiences of those living with an adult who has diabetes | Qualitative: Phenomenological approach | SO wanted to help the with diabetes management. Hypoglycaemia is a concern for SO and diabetes can negatively impact relationships, which can have an emotional impact. SO would like more support in managing diabetes. |
| 2 Lawton, J., Rankin, D., Elliot, J., Heller, S., Rogers, H., De Zoysa, N. and Amiel, S. ( | Experiences, Views and Support Needs of Family Members of People with Hypoglycemia Unawareness: Interview Study | Family members of were recruited from type 1 diabetes patients that were participating in the DAFNE-HART study for people with HU, this study was carried out in two diabetes centres within the UK. | Significant others that helped diabetes patients in their management of HU | Qualitative- Grounded theory | SO supporting HU patients are in urgent need of emotional support. There is a a requirement for healthcare professional to have a heightened awareness about the condition and more there is a requirement for the development of proactive support for family. |
| 3 King, J., Overland, J., Fisher, M. and White, K. ( | Severe Hypoglycaemia and the Role of the Significant Other, Expert, Sentry, and Protector | Seven significant others participated | Participants that had played a pivotal assistive role in the management of severe hypoglycaemia episodes. | Qualitative: narrative inquiry | HU episodes were traumatic and had a heavy impact on the SO lives. SO were heavily relied upon to detect and treat episodes of severe hypoglycaemia. The SO as a result became the expert in the condition, the sentry by being prepared for episodes and the protector by being there to care for the person with HU. |
| 4 Rankin, D., Elliot, J., Heller, S., Amiel, S., Rogers, H., DeZoysa, N. and J Lawton. ( | Experiences of hypoglycaemia unawareness amongst people with Type 1 diabetes: A qualitative investigation. | People with Type 1 diabetes who have hypoglycaemia unawareness that required second party assistance from a significant other | To explore the effects that HU has on everyday life for both individuals with type 1 diabetes and their families involved in their care. | Qualitative: Grounded theory | Since the HU diagnosis reports suggested of a decline in previous pastimes and hobbies. Concerns were raised about the HU patient being a burden to their SO and health care professionals appeared to focus more on the clinical aspect of the condition opposed to the psychological and emotional aspect of the illness. |
| 5 Kovacs, B., Nicolucci, A., Hol, R,. Willaing, I., Hermanns, S., Kalra,S., Wens, J., Pouwer, F., Skovlund, S. and Peyrot, M. ( | Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs second study (DAWN2 tm): Cross-national benchmarking indicators for family members living with people with diabetes. | 2057 adult family members | To explore the lived experiences of those living with an adult who has diabetes | Qualitative: Mixed Methods Phenomenological approach | Some SO (35.3%) reported that looking after a person with diabetes was burdensome and felt that their emotional wellbeing was impacted. 61.3% of SO worried about complications of diabetes such as HU. SO wanted to be more involved in the care of the person with diabetes but expressed concerns that they did not know enough about the condition. |
Fig. 1Flowchart of the study selection process for systematic reviews.
Results of the CASP qualitative appraisal - CASP (2017) About Us [online]. Available at: http://www.casp-uk.net/aboutus.
| CASP Question Number | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Yes: No: Can't Tell | Judgement of quality (Good/Average/Poor) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 9:1:0 | Good | |
| 2 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 9:0:1 | Good | |
| 3 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 10:0:0 | Good | |
| 4 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 10:0:0 | Good |
Results of the qualitative Mixed Methodology Appraisal Tool (MMAT).
| MMAT Question Number | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Yes: No: Can't Tell | Judgement of quality (Good/Average/Poor) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | 5:1:0 | Good | |
| Overall Quality = Number of criteria met/Number of criteria | 0.83 | ||||||||