Online psychological interventions to reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety, and general distress in those with chronic health conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 15 years, there has been substantial growth in web-based psychological interventions. We summarize evidence regarding the efficacy of web-based self-directed psychological interventions on depressive, anxiety and distress symptoms in people living with a chronic health condition. METHOD: We searched Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE databases and Cochrane Database from 1990 to 1 May 2019. English language papers of randomized controlled trials (usual care or waitlist control) of web-based psychological interventions with a primary or secondary aim to reduce anxiety, depression or distress in adults with a chronic health condition were eligible. Results were assessed using narrative synthases and random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: In total 70 eligible studies across 17 health conditions [most commonly: cancer (k = 20), chronic pain (k = 9), arthritis (k = 6) and multiple sclerosis (k = 5), diabetes (k = 4), fibromyalgia (k = 4)] were identified. Interventions were based on CBT principles in 46 (66%) studies and 42 (60%) included a facilitator. When combining all chronic health conditions, web-based interventions were more efficacious than control conditions in reducing symptoms of depression g = 0.30 (95% CI 0.22-0.39), anxiety g = 0.19 (95% CI 0.12-0.27), and distress g = 0.36 (95% CI 0.23-0.49). CONCLUSION: Evidence regarding effectiveness for specific chronic health conditions was inconsistent. While self-guided online psychological interventions may help to reduce symptoms of anxiety, depression and distress in people with chronic health conditions in general, it is unclear if these interventions are effective for specific health conditions. More high-quality evidence is needed before definite conclusions can be made.

Impact of quarterly professional-mode flash glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes in general practice (GP-OSMOTIC): Secondary psychological and self-care outcomes of a pragmatic, open-label, 12-month, randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: To investigate the impact of quarterly professional-mode flash glucose monitoring on psychological outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes in primary care. METHODS: The GP-OSMOTIC trial randomised 299 adults with type 2 diabetes in 25 general practices to quarterly use of professional-mode flash glucose monitoring (sensor worn for 14 days; data discussed at clinic visit) or usual care. At baseline and 12 months, participants completed validated measures: general emotional well-being (WHO-5), diabetes-specific quality of life (DIDP), satisfaction with glucose monitoring (GME-Q), self-care activities (SDSCA) and perceived involvement in clinical care (PICS). Linear mixed-effects models examined between-group differences at 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, there were no clinically important between-arm differences in any secondary psychological or self-care outcomes. Per protocol analyses showed no clinically significant between-group differences. CONCLUSIONS: The GP-OSMOTIC intervention had no significant impact, at 12 months, on general emotional well-being, diabetes-specific quality of life or satisfaction with glucose monitoring, suggesting no added psychological burden. Lack of positive impact on self-reported self-care activities or perceived involvement in clinical care may warrant closer attention to the fidelity of intervention delivery, the context (e.g. the nature of clinician-patient interactions) and/or the sensitivity of the measures, as these will help plan future studies.

'I wish my health professionals understood that it's not just all about your HbA1c !'. Qualitative responses from the second Diabetes MILES - Australia (MILES-2) study.

AIMS: Optimal diabetes management requires daily selfmanagement. While little time is spent with health professionals, they can have a substantial impact on how a person manages and feels about living with diabetes. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore what people with diabetes wish their health professionals understood about living with diabetes. METHODS: Thematic analysis was conducted of responses to a single open-ended question, 'What do you wish your health professional understood about living with diabetes?', which was part of the Diabetes MILES-2 survey, assessing the psychological and behavioural aspects of living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in Australian adults. RESULTS: In total, 1316 responses (56% response rate) were collected, with 1190 responses included for analysis (54% from respondents with type 1 diabetes, 46% from those with type 2 diabetes). Seven major themes emerged; respondents wished their health professional understood: 1) the potential barriers to diabetes management; 2) that it is 'easier said than done'; 3) the social/emotional impact; 4) that they want, need and deserve more; 5) that judgements, assumptions and negative perspective are not helpful; 6) more about diabetes; and 7) that the respondent is the expert in his/her diabetes. Other comments suggested satisfactory experiences with health professionals, highlighting that some respondents had no wish for their health professional to understand more. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that, although some adults with diabetes are satisfied with their health professionals' understanding of living with diabetes, many report unmet needs and perceive a lack of person-centred care from their health professionals.

Psychosocial aspects and contributions of behavioural science to medication-taking for adults with type 2 diabetes.

The aim of this narrative review was to determine the contribution of behavioural and psychosocial research to the field of medication-taking for adults with type 2 diabetes over the past 25 years. We review the behavioural and psychosocial literature relevant to adults with type 2 diabetes who are treated with oral antidiabetes agents, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and insulin. Delayed uptake of, omission of and non-persistence with medications are significant problems among adults with type 2 diabetes. At each stage of the course of diabetes, during which medication to lower blood glucose is initiated or intensified, ~50% of people take less medication than prescribed. Research aimed at increasing optimal medication-taking behaviour has targeted 'forgetfulness', developing interventions which aid medication-taking, such as reminder devices, with limited success. In parallel, investigation of beliefs about medication has provided insights into the perceived necessity of and concerns about medication and how these inform medication-taking decisions. Guidance is available for health professionals to facilitate shared decision-making, particularly with insulin therapy; however, interventions addressing medication beliefs are limited. Optimal medication-taking behaviour is essential to prevent hyperglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes. Evidence from the past 25 years has demonstrated the association between medication beliefs and medication-taking behaviour. Health professionals need to address medication concerns, and establish and demonstrate the utility of diabetes medication with the individual within the clinical consultation. There are interventions that may assist diabetes health professionals in the shared decision-making process, but further development and more robust evaluation of these tools and techniques is required.

Assessing the impact of diabetes on quality of life: what have the past 25 years taught us?

Over the past 25 years, there has been significant acknowledgement of the importance of assessing the impact of diabetes on quality of life. Yet, despite the development of several diabetes-specific quality of life measures, the challenges we faced in 1995 remain. There is little consensus on the definition of quality of life because of the complexity and subjectivity of the concept. General quality of life comprises several domains of life, and these are highly individualized. Assessing the impact of diabetes on these life domains adds to the complexity. While comprehensive diabetes-specific quality-of-life measures typically increase respondent burden, brief questionnaires may not capture all relevant/important domains. Today, the lack of resolution of these challenges may explain why the impact of diabetes on quality of life is not systematically assessed in research or clinical care. Few researchers report detailed rationales for assessment, there is often a mismatch between the concept of interest and the measure selected, and data are misinterpreted as assessing the impact of diabetes on quality of life when, in reality, related but distinct constructs have been assessed, such as diabetes distress, treatment satisfaction or health status. While significant efforts are being made to increase routine monitoring of psychological well-being and understand the lived experience, no guidelines currently recommend routine clinical assessment of diabetes-specific quality of life, and there is no consensus on which questionnaire(s) to use. The gaps identified in this review need urgent attention, starting with recognition that assessment of diabetes-specific quality of life is as important as biomedical markers, if we are to improve the lives of people with diabetes.

Diabetes stigma is associated with negative treatment appraisals among adults with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes: results from the second Diabetes MILES - Australia (MILES-2) survey.

AIM: To explore factors associated with negative insulin appraisals among adults with Type 2 diabetes, including perceived and experienced diabetes stigma. METHODS: The second Diabetes MILES - Australia study (MILES-2) is a national survey of adults with diabetes, focused on behavioural and psychosocial issues. Subgroup analyses were conducted on the responses of 456 adults with insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes (38% women; mean ± sd age: 61.2 ± 8.8 years; diabetes duration: 14.5 ± 7.5 years; years using insulin: 6.4 ± 5.5). Participants completed validated measures of perceived and experienced diabetes stigma (Type 2 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale), insulin appraisals [Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale (ITAS)] and known correlates of insulin appraisals: diabetes-specific distress (Problem Areas In Diabetes scale) and diabetes-specific self-efficacy (Confidence in Diabetes Self-care scale). A multiple linear regression was conducted (N = 279) to determine the contribution of those variables found to be associated with ITAS Negative scores. RESULTS: Univariable analyses revealed negative insulin appraisals were associated with demographic and self-care characteristics (age, employment status, BMI, years using insulin, injections per day), self-efficacy, diabetes-specific distress and diabetes stigma (all P < 0.01). Number of injections per day [regression coefficient [95% confidence interval]: 0.74 [0.08, 1.40]; P = 0.028], self-efficacy [-0.12 [-0.19, -0.06]; P < 0.001] and diabetes stigma [0.39 (0.31, 0.46); P < 0.001) significantly and independently contributed to the final multivariable model, explaining 58% of the variance in ITAS Negative scores. The independent contribution of diabetes-specific distress was suppressed following the inclusion of diabetes stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first step in understanding the relationship between perceived and experienced diabetes stigma and negative insulin appraisals, and provides quantitative evidence for the strong, independent relationship between these two important constructs.

Assessing Psychological Insulin Resistance in Type 2 Diabetes: a Critical Comparison of Measures.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study aims to examine the operationalisation of 'psychological insulin resistance' (PIR) among people with type 2 diabetes and to identify and critique relevant measures. RECENT FINDINGS: PIR has been operationalised as (1) the assessment of attitudes or beliefs about insulin therapy and (2) hypothetical or actual resistance, or unwillingness, to use to insulin. Five validated PIR questionnaires were identified. None was fully comprehensive of all aspects of PIR, and the rigour and reporting of questionnaire development and psychometric validation varied considerably between measures. Assessment of PIR should focus on the identification of negative and positive attitudes towards insulin use. Actual or hypothetical insulin refusal may be better conceptualised as a potential consequence of PIR, as its assessment overlooks the attitudes that may prevent insulin use. This paper provides guidance on the selection of questionnaires for clinical or research purpose and the development of new, or improvement of existing, questionnaires.

Inconsistent blood glucose checking before driving among drivers with type 1 diabetes: Results from the Australian YourSAY: Glucose Monitoring study.

In a survey of Australian drivers with type 1 diabetes, three-quarters reported not checking their blood glucose consistently before driving. They reported lack of health professional recommendation of this behaviour, less concern about safety, and preference for consuming fast-acting glucose, which may be less effective for mitigating risk.

Explaining psychological insulin resistance in adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: The roles of diabetes distress and current medication concerns. Results from Diabetes MILES--Australia.

AIMS: To investigate the contribution of general and diabetes-specific emotional wellbeing and beliefs about medicines in the prediction of insulin therapy appraisals in adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The sample included Diabetes MILES-Australia cross-sectional survey participants whose primary diabetes treatment was oral hypoglycaemic agents (N=313; 49% women; mean±SD age: 57±9 years; diabetes duration: 7±6 years). They completed validated measures of beliefs about the 'harm' and 'overuse' of medications in general (BMQ General); 'concerns' about and 'necessity' of current diabetes medications (BMQ Specific); negative insulin therapy appraisals (ITAS); depression (PHQ-9); anxiety (GAD-7), and diabetes distress (DDS-17). Factors associated with ITAS Negative scores were examined using hierarchical multiple regressions. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of the variance in ITAS Negative scores (52±10), was explained by: number of complications (ß=-.15, p=.005), DDS-17 subscale 'emotional burden' (ß=.23, p<.001), and 'concerns' about current diabetes treatment (ß=.29, p<.001). General beliefs about medications and general emotional wellbeing did not contribute significantly to the model. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological insulin resistance may reflect broader distress about diabetes and concerns about its treatment but not general beliefs about medicines, depression or anxiety. Reducing diabetes distress and current treatment concerns may improve attitudes towards insulin as a potential therapeutic option.

Negative appraisals of insulin therapy are common among adults with Type 2 diabetes using insulin: Results from Diabetes MILES - Australia cross-sectional survey.

AIM: To identify insulin therapy appraisals among adults with Type 2 diabetes using insulin and how negative appraisals relate to clinical, self-care and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS: Diabetes MILES - Australia 2011 was a national survey of adults with diabetes, focused on behavioural and psychosocial issues. Subgroup analyses were conducted on the responses of 273 adults with Type 2 diabetes using insulin (46% women; mean ± sd age: 59 ± 9 years; diabetes duration: 12 ± 7 years; years using insulin: 4 ± 4). They completed validated measures of insulin therapy appraisals (ITAS), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), diabetes distress (PAID) and diabetes-specific self-efficacy (DES-SF). RESULTS: Insulin was perceived to be very important, and its benefits (e.g. improves health) were endorsed by most (82%). Fifty-one per cent believed that taking insulin means their diabetes has become worse; 51% that insulin causes weight gain; 39% that they have 'failed to manage' their diabetes. Those with the greatest and least 'ITAS negative' scores did not differ by diabetes duration or years using insulin, or by average number of insulin injections or blood glucose checks per day. Those with more negative insulin appraisals were significantly younger (Mean Diff. = 5 years, P < 0.001), less satisfied with recent blood glucose levels (P < 0.001, d = 0.63), had reduced diabetes-specific self-efficacy (P < 0.001, d = 0.7), and were more likely to report depressive symptoms, anxiety or diabetes distress (all P < 0.001, d = 0.65-1.1). CONCLUSIONS: Negative insulin therapy appraisals are common among adults with Type 2 diabetes using insulin, and are associated with lower general and diabetes-specific emotional well-being, reduced diabetes-specific self-efficacy and satisfaction with blood glucose.