Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 2

Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Diabetes Distress Scale for type 2 diabetes and distress levels of the participants

Pages
464–470
Publication Date
2020-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: The Turkish version of the DDS for type 2 diabetes is a reliable tool for assessment of distress levels

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: Studies have shown an increased depression rate in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus T2DM compared to the normal population.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Between August 2015 and January 2016 all the patients who were referred to the T2DM Clinic of İstanbul Medeniyet University were screened, and eligible patients were recruited.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The Turkish version of the DDS for type 2 diabetes is a reliable tool for assessment of distress levels
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Diabetes Distress Scale · Turkish · validation

Abstract

Background/aim: Studies have shown an increased depression rate in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus T2DM compared to the normal population. It is now acknowledged that patients suffer from distress rather than depression. Our aim was to validate the Turkish version of the Diabetes Distress Scale DDS and to show distress levels of the participants. Materials and methods: The scale was translated from English to Turkish by the authors and translated back to English. Between August 2015 and January 2016 all the patients who were referred to the T2DM Clinic of İstanbul Medeniyet University were screened, and eligible patients were recruited. For calculating internal consistency Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used. Results: A total of 205 patients [120 females 58.5% , 85 males 41.5% ] were included. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.874, showing internal consistency. The Spearman Brown correlation coefficient was calculated between the first 9 and second 8 questions as 0.884. Thetotal variances were explained at a level of 66.2% with 4 factors. Sixty-three patients 30% had a score of ≥3, indicating diabetic distress. Correlation analysis showed a significant correlation between total score and HbA1c levels r = 0.152 and P = 0.038 . Conclusion: The Turkish version of the DDS for type 2 diabetes is a reliable tool for assessment of distress levels

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇAKLILI, Ö. T., FEYİZOĞLU, G., ÇOLAK, S. T., DİZMAN, N., ÇAKIR, S. İ. B., OĞUZ, A. (2020). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Diabetes Distress Scale for type 2 diabetes and distress levels of the participants. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 50 - Sayı: 2, 464–470. https://ajindex.com/articles/113410

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Guariguata L, Whiting DR, Hambleton I. Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2013 and projections for 2035. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 2014
  2. 103 (2): 137-149. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2013.11.002 2. Zimmet P, Alberti KGMM, Shaw J. Global and societal implications of the diabetes epidemic. Nature 2001
  3. 414 (6865): 782-787. 3. Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Psychological issues and treatments for people with diabetes. Journal of Clinical Psychology 2001
  4. 57 (4): 457-478. doi: 10.1002/jclp.1041 4. Roy T, Lloyd CE. Epidemiology of depression and diabetes: a systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders 2012
  5. S8- S21. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0327(12)70004-6 5. Park M, Katon WJ, Wolf FM. Depression and risk of mortality in individuals with diabetes: a meta-analysis and systematic review. General Hospital Psychiatry 2013
  6. 35 (3): 217-225. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.01.006 6. Fisher L, Skaff MM, Mullan JT. Clinical depression versus distress among patients with type 2 diabetes: not just a question of semantics. Diabetes Care 2007
  7. 30 (3): 542-548. doi: 10.2337/ dc06-1614 7. Fisher L, Mullan JT, Arean P. Diabetes distress but not clinical depression or depressive symptoms is associated with glycemic control in both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Diabetes Care 2010
  8. 33 (1): 23-28. doi: 10.2337/dc09-1238 8. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5®). Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Psychiatric Association
  9. 2013 9. Perrin NED. Diabetes, depression and distress: the 3D-study. An explorative study to inform practice in the identification and management of depression and/or diabetes-specific distress in people with type 2 diabetes. PhD, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, 2017. 10. Sullivan MD, O’Connor P, Feeney P, Hire D, Simmons DL et al. Depression predicts all-cause mortality: epidemiological evaluation from the ACCORD HRQL substudy. Diabetes Care 2012
  10. 35 (8): 1708-1715. 11. Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Earles J. Assessing psychosocial distress in diabetes development of the diabetes distress scale. Diabetes Care 2005
  11. 28 (3): 626-631. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.3.626 12. Bryant FB, Yarnold PR. Comparing five alternative factormodels of the Student Jenkins Activity Survey: separating the wheat from the chaff. Journal of Personality Assessment 1995
  12. 64 (1): 145-158. 13. Graue M, Haugstvedt A, Wentzel-Larsen T, Iversen MM, Karlsen B et al. Diabetes-related emotional distress in adults: re