Protocol for a feasibility study and process evaluation of a psychosocially modelled diabetes education programme for young people with type 1 diabetes: the Youth Empowerment Skills (YES) programme

INTRODUCTION

Adolescence is a challenging period for young people with type 1 diabetes, associated with worsening glycaemia and care disengagement. Educational interventions in this period tend to focus on diabetes-specific skills, with less emphasis on the psychosocial challenges associated with diabetes experienced by young people. To address this limitation, we codesigned with young people a psychosocially modelled programme of diabetes education, named 'Youth Empowerment Skills' (YES). The programme aims to facilitate a positive adaptation to life with diabetes and engagement with diabetes care through peer-based learning, immersive simulations and support from an outreach youth worker. Here, we present a protocol for a feasibility study of the YES programme.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study was designed following the Medical Research Council Complex Intervention Evaluation Framework to: test the feasibility (acceptance, implementability, recruitment and completion) of the YES programme; and estimate its efficacy in relation to metabolic and psychosocial outcomes. The study will take place in diabetes centres serving socioculturally diverse populations. We will conduct a feasibility randomised controlled trial (waiting-list design) with integrated process evaluation. Fifty young people with type 1 diabetes (aged 14-19 years) will be randomly allocated to either the YES intervention or a waiting-list control. Randomisation acceptability will be assessed with provision for a preference allocation. Outcomes will be evaluated at 6 months, at which point the waiting list participants will be exposed to the YES programme with further follow-up to 12 months. A simultaneous process evaluation will use a mixed-methods approach collecting qualitative and quantitative data. Study findings will be used to optimise the intervention components, outcome measures and recruitment methods to inform a subsequent definitive trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has ethical approval from the UK Health Research Authority (approval IRAS project ID: 279877). Findings will be disseminated in multiple formats for lay and professional audiences.

PROTOCOL DATE AND VERSION

7 April 2021, V.1.1.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04670198.

International comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes: an update and extension

AIMS

To update and extend a previous cross-sectional international comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Data were obtained for 520,392 children and adults with type 1 diabetes from 17 population and five clinic-based data sources in countries or regions between 2016 and 2020. Median HbA_1c (IQR) and proportions of individuals with HbA_1c < 58 mmol/mol (<7.5%), 58-74 mmol/mol (7.5-8.9%) and ≥75 mmol/mol (≥9.0%) were compared between populations for individuals aged <15, 15-24 and ≥25 years. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of HbA_1c < 58 mmol/mol (<7.5%) relative to ≥58 mmol/mol (≥7.5%), stratified and adjusted for sex, age and data source. Where possible, changes in the proportion of individuals in each HbA_1c category compared to previous estimates were calculated.

RESULTS

Median HbA_1c varied from 55 to 79 mmol/mol (7.2 to 9.4%) across data sources and age groups so a pooled estimate was deemed inappropriate. OR (95% CI) for HbA_1c < 58 mmol/mol (<7.5%) were 0.91 (0.90-0.92) for women compared to men, 1.68 (1.65-1.71) for people aged <15 years and 0.81 (0.79-0.82) aged15-24 years compared to those aged ≥25 years. Differences between populations persisted after adjusting for sex, age and data source. In general, compared to our previous analysis, the proportion of people with an HbA_1c  < 58 mmol/l (<7.5%) increased and proportions of people with HbA_1c ≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥9.0%) decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycaemic control of type 1 diabetes continues to vary substantially between age groups and data sources. While some improvement over time has been observed, glycaemic control remains sub-optimal for most people with Type 1 diabetes.

Supporting disengaged children and young people living with diabetes to self-care: a qualitative study in a socially disadvantaged and ethnically diverse urban area

OBJECTIVE

To explore how to enhance services to support the self-care of children and young people (CYP) clinically considered 'disengaged' by diabetes services.

DESIGN

Qualitative study.

SETTING

Two diabetes clinics in an ethnically diverse and socially disadvantaged urban area in the UK. Eligible participants were CYP living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes aged between 10 and 25 years who did not attend their last annual hospital appointment.

PARTICIPANTS

22 CYP (14 female and 8 male) aged between 10 and 19 years old took part. The sample was diverse in terms of ethnicity, age at diagnosis, family composition and presence of diabetes among other family members.

DATA COLLECTION

Semistructured interviews.

DATA ANALYSIS

Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Analysis of participant accounts confirmed the crucial importance of non-medicalised care in CYP diabetes care. A life plan was considered as important to participants as a health plan. Participants valued the holistic support provided by friends, family members and school teachers. However, they found structural barriers in their health and educational pathways as well as disparities in the quality of support at critical moments along the life course. They actively tried to maximise their well-being by balancing life priorities against diabetes priorities. Combined, these features could undermine participants engagement with health services where personal strategies were often held back or edited out of clinical appointments in fear of condemnation.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate why diabetes health teams need to appreciate the conflicting pressures experienced by CYP and to coproduce more nuanced health plans for addressing their concerns regarding identity and risk taking behaviours in the context of their life-worlds. Exploring these issues and identifying ways to better support CYP to address them more proactively should reduce disengagement and set realistic health outcomes that make best use of medical resources.

Non-attendance at diabetes outpatient appointments: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Non-attendance at diabetes outpatient appointments is a sizeable problem worldwide and has been associated with suboptimal health outcomes. We aimed to describe the characteristics, health outcomes and reasons given for non-attendance at doctor- or nurse-led diabetes appointments, and interventions to improve attendance.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsychInfo were searched from database inception to February 2019. Included articles were peer-reviewed, published in English, related to adults or young people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, and addressed one of the above aspects of non-attendance. Studies were excluded if reporting on other types of diabetes or reviewing attendance at structured education, retinal screening, paediatric, antenatal, podiatry or dietetic clinics.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies of varied designs were identified (15 observational, 1 randomized control trial, 9 qualitative, 5 surveys, 4 service improvements). The definition of non-attendance varied. Younger adults, smokers and those with financial pressures were less likely to attend. Non-attendance was associated with higher HbA_1c ; other outcomes were varied but typically worse in non-attenders. Reasons for non-attendance in qualitative studies fell into three categories: balancing the costs and benefits of attendance, coping strategies, and the relationships between the person with diabetes and healthcare professionals. Interventions included appointment management strategies, service improvements, patient navigators and WebCam appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-attendance is only partially explained by logistical issues. Qualitative studies suggest complex psychosocial factors are involved. Interventions have progressed from simple appointment reminders in an attempt to address some of the psycho-social determinants, but more work is needed to improve attendance.

Socioeconomic disparities in access to intensive insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study of patient and healthcare professional perspectives

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes is a complex chronic condition which requires lifelong treatment with insulin. Health outcomes are dependent on ability to self-manage the condition. Socioeconomic inequalities have been demonstrated in access to treatment and health outcomes for adults with type 1 diabetes; however, there is a paucity of research exploring how these disparities occur. This study explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in gaining access to intensive insulin regimens for adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

We undertook a qualitative descriptive study informed by a phenomenological perspective. In-depth face-to-face interviews were conducted with 28 patients and 6 healthcare professionals involved in their care. The interviews were analysed using a thematic approach. The Candidacy theory for access to healthcare for vulnerable groups framed the analysis.

RESULTS

Access to intensive insulin regimens was through hospital-based specialist services in this sample. Patients from lower socioeconomic groups had difficulty accessing hospital-based services if they were in low paid work and because they lacked the ability to navigate the healthcare system. Once these patients were in the specialist system, access to intensive insulin regimens was limited by non-alignment with healthcare professional goals, poor health literacy, psychosocial problems and poor quality communication. These factors could also affect access to structured diabetes education which itself improved access to intensive insulin regimens. Contact with diabetes specialist nurses and attendance at structured diabetes education courses could ameliorate these barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to intensive insulin regimens was hindered for people in lower socioeconomic groups by a complex mix of factors relating to the permeability of specialist services, ability to navigate the healthcare system and patient interactions with healthcare providers. Improving access to diabetes specialist nurses and structured diabetes education for vulnerable patients could lessen socioeconomic disparities in both access to services and health outcomes.