Diabetes-related emotional distress in adults: Reliability and validity of the Norwegian versions of the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID) and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS)
Introduction
The continued gap between clinical results and treatment goals (Eeg-Olofsson et al., 2007, Cooper et al., 2009) has led to increased awareness of the relationships between treatment outcomes and diabetes-related emotional distress and depressive symptoms. Many people living with diabetes do not reach recommended treatment goals despite new and better oral medication, better insulin and improved technologies for insulin delivery. Regular assessment of disease-specific emotional distress is recommended to identify high-risk people with diabetes and to further prevent negative effects on diabetes management (Fisher et al., 2009). Some people with diabetes need help to present their individual concerns and to address essential emotional problems in order to be able to increase their self-care efforts. Nevertheless, both mild and serious psychological problems are greatly under diagnosed among people with diabetes (Pouwer et al., 2006).
The Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale (PAID) (Polonsky et al., 1995, Welch et al., 1997, Welch et al., 2003) and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) (Polonsky et al., 2005) are commonly used for mapping diabetes-related problem areas and emotional distress. They were developed in the United States and are also translated and validated for use in some European populations (Snoek et al., 2000, Sigurðardóttir and Benediktsson, 2008). Both instruments display good psychometric properties and are used for clinical screening and in research. The PAID items were solicited from 10 health care providers at the Joslin Diabetes Clinic and from patients’ comments into an item pool, resulting in a final measure after piloting of 20 items (Polonsky et al., 1995). The DDS is more conceptually driven and draws items from four pre-established domains of diabetes-related distress (Polonsky et al., 2005). Snoek et al. (2000) maintain that international psychosocial research in diabetes could benefit from standardized instruments to promote further international comparison of results.
Translating and testing instruments for psychosocial assessment across languages, countries and cultures allow for further research collaboration and enhance the prospect of improving treatment and care. Valid and reliable instruments to map disease-related emotional distress and to discriminate between levels of diabetes-related emotional problems and those who are clinically depressed are needed. Furthermore, the availability of sound instruments is important in order to compare results from different behavioral and psychosocial interventions in diabetes (Peyrot and Rubin, 2007). To our knowledge including both PAID and DDS in the same study allowing for consideration of the properties of both instruments in the same sample, have not previously been described internationally.
In the present study, we examine the psychometric properties of the Norwegian versions of the PAID and the DDS instruments and hypothesized that the PAID and DDS scores would be negatively associated with self-rated health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36)) and positively associated with general anxiety and depression levels (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)) as variants of the same construct, and would discriminate diabetes-related emotional distress at a group level.
Section snippets
Design and sample
We invited everyone with type 1 or 2 diabetes, visiting an endocrinology outpatient clinic at a larger University Hospital in Western Norway between October 2008 and February 2009 to participate in this cross-sectional survey study. Inclusion criteria were aged 18–69 years, diagnosed with diabetes for at least 1 year and able to complete a Norwegian questionnaire. The patients were informed about the purpose of the study and the possibility to withdraw at any time. They gave written consent and
Results
The study included 292 Norwegian adults with type 1 (80%) and type 2 diabetes (20%) aged 18–69 years (Table 1). The nonparticipants (n = 119) did not differ in mean age (42.3 years vs. 43.0 years, P = 0.66), sex (male 168 vs. 77 and female 124 vs. 42, P = 0.18) or HbA1c (8.2% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.09).
Discussion
The availability of standardized instruments across languages, countries and cultures enhances the prospect of comparing results from multinational and cross-cultural research. The results from the current study suggest that the Norwegian versions of PAID and DDS have satisfactory psychometric properties to map individual levels of diabetes-related emotional distress among people with diabetes for diagnostic or clinical use. The instruments can discriminate distressed subjects and might be
Conclusion
The Norwegian versions of PAID and DDS seem to be valid and reliable and contribute uniquely in assessing diabetes-related emotional distress. Both instruments have satisfactory psychometric properties to map individual levels of distress among people with diabetes for diagnostic or clinical use. For the use of these instruments in clinical trials the DDS might have some advantages as it also contributes to identifying sub-domains of distress.
Acknowledgements
Bergen University College and the Western Norway Health Authority Trust kindly supported this research. We thank the patients for participating and nurses at the endocrinology outpatient clinic, Ingvild Hernar, Kari Horn, Elisabeth Iversen, Berit M. Tarlebø and Elin Irrborg, for enthusiastic participating in data collection.
Contributions: MG, BR, AH, MIV contributed to study design, MG contributed to data collection; MG, TWL, BK contributed to data analysis and MG, AH, MIV, TWL, BK, BR
References (32)
- et al.
The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. An updated literature review
J. Psychosom. Res.
(2002) - et al.
Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines
J. Clin. Epidemiol.
(1993) - et al.
A cross-sectional survey of self-perceived health status and metabolic control values in patients with type 2 diabetes
Int. J. Nurs. Stud.
(2011) - et al.
Translation and performance of the Norwegian SF-36 health survey in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, I. Data quality, scaling, assumptions, reliability, and construct validity
J. Clin. Epidemiol.
(1998) - et al.
Nurses’ recognition and registration of depression, anxiety and diabetes-specific emotional problems in outpatients with diabetes mellitus
Patient Educ. Couns.
(2006) - et al.
Reliability and validity of the Icelandic version of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) Scale
Int J. Nurs. Stud.
(2008) - et al.
Anxiety and depression symptoms in patients with diabetes
Diabet. Med.
(2009) - et al.
A novel application of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) instrument to improve glycemic control and patient satisfaction
Diab. Educ.
(2010) - et al.
Quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care in Norway is improving
Diabetes Care
(2009) - et al.
Glycemic and risk factor control in Type 1 diabetes
Diabetes Care
(2007)