Intersectional analysis of social disparities in type 2 diabetes risk among adults in Germany: results from a nationwide population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Differences in type 2 diabetes risk have been reported for several sociodemographic determinants including sex/gender or socioeconomic status. From an intersectional perspective, it is important to not only consider the role of social dimensions individually, but also their intersections. This allows for a deeper understanding of diabetes risk and preventive needs among diverse population groups. METHODS: As an intersectionality-informed approach, multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA) was used in a population-based sample of adults without known diabetes in Germany from the cross-sectional survey "Disease knowledge and information needs- Diabetes mellitus (2017)". Diabetes risk was assessed by the German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS, range 0-122 points), estimating the individual risk of developing type 2 diabetes within the next 5 years based on established self-reported risk factors. Nesting individuals in 12 intersectional strata defined by combining sex/gender, educational level, and history of migration, we calculated measures to quantify the extent to which individual differences in diabetes risk were explained at strata level, and how much this was due to additive or multiplicative intersectional effects of social determinants. RESULTS: Drawing on data of 2,253 participants, we found good discriminatory accuracy of intersectional strata (variance partition coefficient = 14.00% in the simple intersectional model). Model-predicted GDRS means varied between 29.97 (corresponding to a "low risk" of < 2%) in women with high educational level and a history of migration, and 52.73 ("still low risk" of 2-5%) in men with low educational level without a history of migration. Variance in GDRS between strata was mainly explained by additive effects of social determinants (proportional change in variance to intersectional interaction model = 77.95%) with being male and having low educational level being associated with higher GDRS. There was no evidence of multiplicative effects in individual strata. CONCLUSIONS: Type 2 diabetes risk differed between intersectional strata and can to some extent be explained at strata level. The role of intersectional effects was minor and needs to be further investigated. Findings suggest a need for specific preventive measures targeted at large groups with increased diabetes risk, such as men and persons with low educational level.

Smartphone-assisted training with education for patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (SmArt-E): study protocol for a multicentre pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Hip and knee osteoarthritis are associated with functional limitations, pain and restrictions in quality of life and the ability to work. Furthermore, with growing prevalence, osteoarthritis is increasingly causing (in)direct costs. Guidelines recommend exercise therapy and education as primary treatment strategies. Available options for treatment based on physical activity promotion and lifestyle change are often insufficiently provided and used. In addition, the quality of current exercise programmes often does not meet the changing care needs of older people with comorbidities and exercise adherence is a challenge beyond personal physiotherapy. The main objective of this study is to investigate the short- and long-term (cost-)effectiveness of the SmArt-E programme in people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain and physical functioning compared to usual care. METHODS: This study is designed as a multicentre randomized controlled trial with a target sample size of 330 patients. The intervention is based on the e-Exercise intervention from the Netherlands, consists of a training and education programme and is conducted as a blended care intervention over 12 months. We use an app to support independent training and the development of self-management skills. The primary and secondary hypotheses are that participants in the SmArt-E intervention will have less pain (numerical rating scale) and better physical functioning (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) compared to participants in the usual care group after 12 and 3 months. Other secondary outcomes are based on domains of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI). The study will be accompanied by a process evaluation. DISCUSSION: After a positive evaluation, SmArt-E can be offered in usual care, flexibly addressing different care situations. The desired sustainability and the support of the participants' behavioural change are initiated via the app through audio-visual contact with their physiotherapists. Furthermore, the app supports the repetition and consolidation of learned training and educational content. For people with osteoarthritis, the new form of care with proven effectiveness can lead to a reduction in underuse and misuse of care as well as contribute to a reduction in (in)direct costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00028477. Registered on August 10, 2022.

Perceived Chronic Stress Is Associated With the German Diabetes Risk Score Among Adults Without Known Diabetes in Germany.

OBJECTIVE: There is evidence that psychological distress increases the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D), but implications for prevention remain elusive. We examined the association between chronic stress and the German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS) among adults without diabetes in Germany. METHODS: The study population consisted of 4654 persons aged 18 to 64 years without known diabetes drawn from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (2008-2011). The predicted 5-year T2D risk (in percent) was estimated using the GDRS. Perceived chronic stress was assessed by the Screening Scale of the Trier Inventory for the Assessment of Chronic Stress and categorized into "up to average," "above average," and "high." The cross-sectional association of chronic stress with log-transformed GDRS (expressed as geometric mean ratio [GMR]) was analyzed in multivariable linear regression models. Covariables included age, sex, community size, region, educational level, living alone, social support, depression, and alcohol use. RESULTS: The mean predicted 5-year T2D risk rates were 2.7%, 2.9%, and 3.0% for chronic stress up to average, above average, and high chronic stress, respectively. Adjusted mean predicted 5-year risk was significantly higher among persons with chronic stress above average (GMR = 1.10, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.19) and high stress (GMR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.06-1.39) compared with persons with chronic stress up to average. No interactions with sex or other covariables were found. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived chronic stress is independently associated with an increased predicted T2D risk in cross-sectional analysis and should be considered as T2D risk factor in longitudinal studies.

Defining and assessing adverse events and harmful effects in psychotherapy study protocols: A systematic review.

The assessment of safety data has become a standard across many clinical interventions. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the extent to which harm is addressed within psychotherapy study protocols. The review includes study protocols of randomized controlled trials published between 2004 and 2017 investigating the effects of psychotherapy in adult patients with affective disorders, phobia, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and/or personality disorders. We conducted a systematic search in the CENTRAL, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases as well as in relevant journals. In total, 115 study protocols were included, examining 168 psychotherapy and 85 control conditions. These protocols differed considerably in the way they conceptualized harm: 77 explicitly addressed harm, 62 considered serious adverse events, and 39 considered adverse events. Although serious adverse events were defined somewhat consistently, adverse events were not. Our results imply that clinical researchers do not apply standardized approaches with regard to harm concepts, assessment, and management. To gather data on frequencies of harmful effects, we argue a higher degree of standardization would be useful. Feasible recommendations are provided based on examples of good practice from the reviewed study protocols. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Diabetes-related distress and associated factors among adults with diabetes in Germany: Results of the nationwide study "Disease knowledge and information needs - Diabetes mellitus 2017".

BACKGROUND: Diabetes-related distress (DRD) can affect diabetes management adversely. In lack of population-based data, the frequency and determinants of DRD among adults with diabetes in Germany remain controversial. METHODS: This study included 1367 adults with diabetes who participated in a nationwide health telephone survey conducted among German adults aged 18 years and older in 2017. The short form of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-5) scale was used to assess DRD. The associations of high DRD (PAID-5 sum score ≥ 8) with socio-demographics, diabetes-related risk factors, diabetes clinical characteristics as well as quality of self-care and chronic illness care assessed by patients were tested in multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: The overall DRD prevalence was 15.1% (95% confidence intervals, 95% CIs, 12.5-18.0%) with no significant difference between men (14.7%, 95% CIs 11.2-19.1%) and women (15.4%, 11.9-19.8%). In multivariable analyses, DRD was significantly associated with younger age (odds ratio 0.96, 95% CIs 0.94-0.98, per year), immigration background (2.26, 1.16-4.42), current smoking (2.06, 1.14-3.70), insulin use (2.57, 1.45-4.56), and the presence of diabetes-specific complications (1.80, 1.10-2.94) or depressive symptoms (5.34, 3.24-8.81). Among those with depressive symptoms (18,4% of the study population), 38.3% also had DRD, which accounted for 7.0% (95% CIs 5.3-9.3%) of the study population. CONCLUSION: DRD is a common health problem among adults with diabetes in Germany, and highly correlates with depressive symptoms, current smoking, immigration background, and insulin use. Addressing DRD needs to become an integrative part of ambulatory diabetes care.

Perceived Access to Health Care Services and Relevance of Telemedicine during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany.

During the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, non-pharmaceutical interventions were imposed to contain the spread of the virus. Based on cross-sectional waves in March, July and December 2020 of the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO), the present study investigated the impact of the introduced measures on the perceived access to health care. Additionally, for the wave in December, treatment occasion as well as utilization and satisfaction regarding telemedicine were analysed. For 18-74-year-old participants requiring medical care, descriptive and logistic regression analyses were performed. During the less strict second lockdown in December, participants reported more frequently ensured access to health care (91.2%) compared to the first lockdown in March (86.8%), but less frequently compared to July (94.2%) during a period with only mild restrictions. In December, main treatment occasions of required medical appointments were check-up visits at the general practitioner (55.2%) and dentist (36.2%), followed by acute treatments at the general practitioner (25.6%) and dentist (19.0%), treatments at the physio-, ergo- or speech therapist (13.1%), psychotherapist (11.9%), and scheduled hospital admissions or surgeries (10.0%). Of the participants, 20.0% indicated utilization of telemedical (15.4% telephone, 7.6% video) consultations. Of them, 43.7% were satisfied with the service. In conclusion, for the majority of participants, access to medical care was ensured during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, access slightly decreased during phases of lockdown. Telemedicine complemented the access to medical appointments.

[Mental Distress and Resilience in Severe Somatic Diseases: An Analysis of Dyadic Relations]. / Psychische Belastung und Resilienz im Rahmen schwerer körperlicher Erkrankungen: eine Analyse dyadischer Zusammenhänge.

AIMS: In this article, we present 3 studies examining patients with current or previous severe physical illness and their partners with respect to dyadic concordance, gender and role differences in mental distress and resilience. METHODS: Study 1 included 55 patients and their partners on average 4.5 years after severe sepsis. Study 2 involved 49 patients with lung cancer, predominantly in advanced stage with metastases, and their partners. In study 3, 69 cancer patients with various tumor entities and tumor stages undergoing additional outpatient homeopathic treatment as well as their partners were examined. All studies used the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to measure mental distress and the short version of the Resilience Scale RS-13 to assess resilience as a personality trait. Results were meta-analytically pooled across the 3 studies. RESULTS: We found dyadic concordances between patient and partner in anxiety (r=0.29 [0.06; 0.48], I2=55%) and depression (r=0.44 [0.31; 0.55], I2=0%), but not in resilience. Gender differences emerged consistently across all three studies, both female patients and partners showed more severe anxiety symptoms than males (d=0.58 [0.26; 0.91], I2=0% for patients; d=0.53 [- 0.06; 1.12], I2=69% for partners). Results were heterogeneous for gender differences in depression and for role differences. Higher resilience scores were associated with lower mental distress both in patients and partners. There is some evidence that resilience has a protective effect for mental distress of the spouse. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Based on the results on dyadic concordance between patients and partners in mental distress somatic diseases should always be considered from a systemic perspective. Mental distress of both patients and partners requires special attention in psychosocial support, and partnership resources should be taken into account for coping with the disease.

[Health reporting as part of public health surveillance: the example of diabetes]. / Gesundheitsberichterstattung im Rahmen von Public Health Surveillance: Das Beispiel Diabetes.

The continuous collection and analysis of health data on relevant diseases (surveillance) is at the core of public health. The surveillance enables the implementation of measures to protect the populations' health. Therefore, relevant information needs to be provided in a timely and target-group-specific manner to the respective stakeholders.A dissemination strategy supports the effective communication of results and considers three key questions: (1) "What content is relevant to the surveillance?", (2) "Who requires which information?" and (3) "How are the results disseminated to the target audience?" In this context, digitalisation allows for novel possibilities in the design of publication formats.Since 2015, diabetes surveillance has been established at the Robert Koch Institute. Within a structured process of consensus, we defined four fields of action relevant for health policy including 40 indicators. Thereafter, we developed the first publication formats in collaboration with the scientific advisory board of the project that reflected novel possibilities offered by digitalisation. In addition to articles in scientific journals, the essential formats of the first project phase comprise the report "Diabetes in Germany" and a website including interactive visualisations of results. Additional posts on Twitter and YouTube are used to increase coverage.In addition to the further development of the indicator set, the focus of the next project phase is the advancement of the dissemination towards user- and action-oriented reporting. In close exchange with the scientific advisory board, we aim to explore the requirements of the target audience and reflect them in the design of further publication formats.

Trait resilience and mental health in older adults: A meta-analytic review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to systematically review research on the association between resilience as a personality trait and mental health in older adults and to meta-analytically quantify this relation. METHODS: We included studies assessing older adults (mean age 60 years or older), measuring trait resilience with a version of the Resilience Scale (RS) by Wagnild and Young and mental health. We conducted a comprehensive search in Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, PubPsych, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Full Text database and the theses database of the German National Library for eligible studies. Study data on associations between resilience and mental health were aggregated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies with 13 444 participants were included. Trait resilience and mental health were strongly interrelated (r = 0.40, 95% CI [0.36; 0.44]) with substantial heterogeneity (I2  = 83%). Published studies revealed larger associations between resilience and mental health (r = 0.41 [0.37; 0.45]) than unpublished studies (r = 0.25 [0.11; 0.38]). CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of resilience are associated with better mental health in older persons. Because associations were solely assessed cross-sectionally, longitudinal studies are highly needed to draw causal inferences. © 2020 The Authors Personality and Mental Health Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The Association Between Resilience and Mental Health in the Somatically Ill.

BACKGROUND: Resilience refers to an individual's positive adaptation to the experience of adversity. The maintenance of mental health is commonly considered a sign of successful coping with adverse conditions. The goal of the present meta-analysis was to investigate the association between resilience and mental health in patients with a somatic illness or health problem. METHODS: Studies were included if they reported measures of association between resilience, as assessed using a version of Wagnild and Young's Resilience Scale, and self-reported mental health. A systematic literature search was conducted in the Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, PubPsych, and ProQuest databases and in the dissertation catalogue of the German National Library. In addition, a manual search was carried out. The study was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42017054822). RESULTS: 55 studies involving a total of 15 003 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Assuming a random-effects model, the weighted mean Pearson correlation between resilience and mental health was r = 0.43 (95% confidence interval [0.39; 0.48], p<0.001). This association was robust, although the heterogeneity among individual effect sizes was substantial (I2 = 89.6%). Correlations tended to be weaker in unpublished studies than in published ones. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial heterogeneity across studies, the findings suggest a strong association between resilience and mental health in the somatically ill. In clinical practice, a lack of resilience as a resource for successful coping might indicate a need for psychosocial support during treatment for somatic illness.