Dataset Information

Diabetes Distress Among Dyads of Patients and Their Health Supporters: Links With Functional Support, Metabolic Outcomes, and Cardiac Risk.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with diabetes (PWD) often experience diabetes distress which is associated with worse self-management and glycemic control. In contrast, PWD who receive support from family and friends (supporters) have better diabetes outcomes.

Purpose

To examine the associations of PWD diabetes distress and supporters' distress about PWDs' diabetes with supporters' roles and PWD cardiometabolic outcomes.

Methods

We used baseline data from 239 adults with Type 2 diabetes and their supporters participating in a longitudinal trial. PWD and supporter diabetes distress (high vs. low) were determined using the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale-5. Outcomes included PWD-reported help from supporters with self-care activities, supporter-reported strain, PWD metabolic outcomes (glycemic control [HbA1c], systolic blood pressure [SBP], and non-HDL cholesterol) and 5 and 10 year risk of cardiac event (calculated using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study algorithm).

Results

PWDs with high diabetes distress were more likely to report that their supporters helped with taking medications, coordinating medical care, and home glucose testing (p's < .05), but not more likely to report help with diet or exercise. High supporter distress was associated with greater supporter strain (p < .001). High supporter diabetes distress was associated with higher PWD HbA1c (p = .045), non-HDL cholesterol (p = .011), and 5 (p = .002) and 10 year (p = .001) cardiac risk.

Conclusions

Adults with high diabetes distress report more supporter help with medically focused self-management but not with diet and exercise. Supporter distress about PWD diabetes was consistently associated with worse outcomes. PWD diabetes distress had mixed associations with their diabetes outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Lee AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8677591 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveEffective diabetes self-management can prevent long-term health complications but is often complex and difficult to achieve. Health care professionals' support for patients' autonomy (autonomy support) in managing their diabetes contributes to better diabetes self-care and glycemic control. Most adults with diabetes also receive self-management support from informal health supporters. Yet, the role of autonomy support from these informal health supporters has not been explored. We examined patients' perceived autonomy support from their main health supporter (family member or friend) in relation to their diabetes distress, self-efficacy, self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), medication adherence, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c).MethodThree hundred twenty-six veterans with Type 2 diabetes at high risk for complications, who identified a main health supporter, were surveyed using self-report measures of social support, diabetes distress, self-efficacy, and self-care. HbA1c and prescription fill data were extracted from VA electronic records for the 12-months before and after the survey. Linear regression and linear mixed models examined the associations of autonomy support with diabetes distress, self-efficacy, SMBG, medication adherence, and glycemic control, controlling for participant-supporter relationship characteristics and patient-factors.ResultsIn adjusted models, greater autonomy support was associated with lower diabetes distress (B = -.323, SE = .098, p = .001), greater self-efficacy (B = .819, SE = .148, p < .001), more frequent SMBG (B = .297, SE = .082, p < .001), and better subsequent 12-month glycemic control (B = .257, SE = .085, p = .003) but not with medication adherence (B = .001, SE = .020, p = .994).ConclusionsAutonomy support from main health supporters is significantly associated better diabetes related attitudes, self-care, and glycemic control after adjusting for relationship and patient characteristics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Project description:BackgroundPatients with cancer and their relatives often suffer from psychosocial burdens following a cancer diagnosis. Psychosocial cancer support services offer support for cancer patients and their relatives. Only a few studies have focused on associations of psychological factors within patient-relative dyads. This study aims to assess associations between the patients' or relatives' self-efficacy and their levels of distress and anxiety who seek help together at psychosocial cancer support centres.MethodsParticipants were recruited at two psychosocial cancer support centres in a major city in Germany. Patients with cancer and their relatives seeking support together received the questionnaire before their first support session. Self-efficacy was assessed with the Pearlin sense of mastery scale, distress with the distress thermometer and anxiety with the General Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD-7). For the analysis, the actor-partner interdependence model was applied.ResultsThe data analysis was based on 41 patient-relative dyads (patients: 39% women, mean age 53.5; relatives: 66% women, mean age 52.16). A significant actor effect from self-efficacy to distress was found for patients (r = -0.47) but not for relatives (r = -0.15). Partner effects from self-efficacy to distress were not significant (r = -0.03, r = -0.001). The actor effect from self-efficacy to anxiety for patients (r = -0.61) as well as relatives was significant (r = -0.62), whereas the partner effect was significant for patients (r = 0.16) but not for relatives (r = -0.46).ConclusionThe results suggest that patients' and relatives' self-efficacy is associated with their distress and anxiety. Partner effects were visible for patients' self-efficacy and relatives' anxiety. These findings suggest that self-efficacy is an important factor for the psychological well-being of patients and relatives and that it may additionally be associated with the partners' well-being. Longitudinal research with larger samples is needed to support the findings.