Diabesity in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-sectional Study Exploring Self-care and Its Determinants

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to describe self-care maintenance, self-care monitoring, self-care management and self-care self-efficacy in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and body mass index (BMI)<30 kg/m2 and adults with T2DM and BMI≥30 kg/m2 ("diabesity"), and to identify their clinical and sociodemographic determinants. Self-care is one of the main treatments for adults with T2DM. However, self-care has been poorly described in people with diabesity, and differences in clinical and sociodemographic determinants of self-care between patients with diabesity and patients with T2DM and BMI<30 kg/m2 have, to our knowledge, not been assessed.

METHODS

A secondary analysis was performed of sociodemographic and clinical data using a multicentre, observational, cross-sectional design, wherein 540 adults diagnosed with T2DM were included in a consecutive and convenience sampling procedure.

RESULTS

Self-care maintenance and management were significantly lower among patients with diabesity (p<0.001 and p=0.025, respectively). Among patients with diabesity, low income (relative risk [RR]=3.27, p=0.01) and presence of diabetic neuropathy (RR=4.16; p=0.03) were strongly associated with inadequate self-care maintenance; completion of high school (RR=0.45; p=0.01), availability of a family caregiver (RR=0.52; p=0.04) and the use of insulin as the main treatment (RR=2.09; p=0.01) decreased the likelihood of inadequate self-care monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

The unfavourable behavioural profile of patients with diabesity could be further worsened by their lower level of confidence in performing adequate self-care.

Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: Patients' and Caregivers' Perceptions of Glycemic Control

OBJECTIVES

(1) to describe pediatric patients with T1D and their caregivers' perceptions of measures of glycemic control (hemoglobin [A1C] and blood glucose [BG] levels) and (2) to determine the relationship between patients' and caregivers' perceptions of measures of glycemic control with actual A1C levels and adherence to diabetes self-care behaviors.

METHODS

Patients (8 to 18 years) with T1D and caregivers completed questionnaires that queried their perceptions of (1) what the A1C level assesses, (2) the ideal A1C target, and (3) the ideal BG range. Point-of-care A1C levels were measured for each patient. They also completed the Self-Care Inventory Revised (SCI-R) to assess adherence to diabetes self-care behaviors.

RESULTS

Among 253 dyads, the frequencies of patients compared to caregivers who could accurately describe what the A1C level assesses, identify the ideal A1C target, and identify the ideal BG range were 20 vs. 66, 31 vs. 56, and 72 vs. 76%, respectively. Patients' accuracy in reporting ideal targets for glycemic control was significantly associated with caregivers' accuracy. There was a trend for lower median A1C levels in patients who were part of a dyad wherein both had accurate perceptions of glycemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and caregivers had accurate knowledge of ideal BG range but were less knowledgeable about the meaning of A1C levels and ideal A1C targets. Nevertheless, whether glycemic control was perceived as an A1C measurement or a BG range, A1C levels trended lower for patients when both they and their caregivers had accurate perceptions of glycemic control.