The suitability of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess the impact of hypoglycaemia on quality of life in people with diabetes: a systematic review using COSMIN methods

Aims/hypothesis It is generally accepted that hypoglycaemia can negatively impact the quality of life (QoL) of people living with diabetes. However, the suitability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess this impact is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to identify PROMs used to assess the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL and examine their quality and psychometric properties. Methods Systematic searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library databases) were undertaken to identify published articles reporting on the development or validation of hypoglycaemia-specific PROMs used to assess the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL (or domains of QoL) in adults with diabetes. A protocol was developed and registered with PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42019125153). Studies were assessed for inclusion at title/abstract stage by one reviewer. Full-text articles were scrutinised where considered relevant or potentially relevant or where doubt existed. Twenty per cent of articles were assessed by a second reviewer. PROMS were evaluated, according to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers against COSMIN criteria. Assessment of each PROM’s content validity included reviewer ratings (N = 16) of relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility: by researchers (n = 6); clinicians (n = 6); and adults with diabetes (n = 4). Results Of the 214 PROMs used to assess the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL (or domains of QoL), seven hypoglycaemia-specific PROMS were identified and subjected to full evaluation: the Fear of Hypoglycemia 15-item scale; the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey; the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey version II; the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II short-form; the Hypoglycemic Attitudes and Behavior Scale; the Hypoglycemic Confidence Scale; and the QoLHYPO questionnaire. Content validity was rated as ‘inconsistent’, with most as ‘(very) low’ quality, while structural validity was deemed ‘unsatisfactory’. Other measurement properties (e.g. reliability) varied, and evidence gaps were apparent across all PROMs. None of the identified studies addressed cross-cultural validity or measurement error. Criterion validity and responsiveness were not assessed due to the lack of a ‘gold standard’ measure of the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL against which to compare the PROMS. Conclusions/interpretation None of the hypoglycaemia-specific PROMs identified had sufficient evidence to demonstrate satisfactory validity, reliability and responsiveness. All were limited in terms of content and structural validity, which restricts their utility for assessing the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL in the clinic or research setting. Further research is needed to address the content validity of existing PROMs, or the development of new PROM(s), for the purpose of assessing the impact of hypoglycaemia on QoL. Prospero registration CRD4201912515

The impact of hypoglycemia on quality of life and related outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

Objective To conduct a systematic review to examine associations between hypoglycemia and quality of life (QoL) in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Methods Four databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched systematically in November 2019 and searches were updated in September 2021. Studies were eligible if they included children and/or adolescents with type 1 diabetes, reported on the association between hypoglycemia and QoL (or related outcomes), had a quantitative design, and were published in a peer-reviewed journal after 2000. A protocol was registered the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020154023). Studies were evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute’s critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted by outcome and hypoglycemia severity. Results In total, 27 studies met inclusion criteria. No hypoglycemia-specific measures of QoL were identified. Evidence for an association between SH and (domains) of generic and diabetes-specific QoL was too limited to draw conclusions, due to heterogenous definitions and operationalizations of hypoglycemia and outcomes across studies. SH was associated with greater worry about hypoglycemia, but was not clearly associated with diabetes distress, depression, anxiety, disordered eating or posttraumatic stress disorder. Although limited, some evidence suggests that more recent, more frequent, or more severe episodes of hypoglycemia may be associated with adverse outcomes and that the context in which hypoglycemia takes places might be important in relation to its impact. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence regarding the impact of hypoglycemia on QoL in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes at this stage. There is a need for further research to examine this relationship, ideally using hypoglycemia-specific QoL measures

Comment on the consensus report on the management of hyperglycaemia in Type 2 diabetes by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes

Letter to the edito

Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review

Aims To explore the association between the use of glycaemic technologies and person-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods We included T1D and technology publications reporting on PROs since 2014. Only randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that used validated PRO measures (PROMs) were considered. Results T1D studies reported on a broad range of validated PROMs, mainly as secondary outcome measures. Most studies examined continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM), and the role of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), including sensor-augmented CSII and closed loop systems. Generally, studies demonstrated a positive impact of technology on hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific PROs, including reduced fear of hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress, and greater satisfaction with diabetes treatment. In contrast, generic PROMs (including measures of health/functional status, emotional well-being, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality) were less likely to demonstrate improvements associated with the use of glycaemic technologies. Several studies showed contradictory findings, which may relate to study design, population and length of follow-up. Differences in PRO findings were apparent between randomised controlled trials and cohort studies, which may be due to different populations studied and/or disparity between trial and real-world conditions. Conclusions PROs are usually assessed as secondary outcomes in glycaemic technology studies. Hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific, but not generic, PROs show the benefits of glycaemic technologies, and deserve a more central role in future studies as well as routine clinical care

Changes in quality of life following hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of longitudinal studies

Aim To conduct a systematic review of published studies reporting on the longitudinal impacts of hypoglycaemia on quality of life (QoL) in adults with type 2 diabetes. Method Database searches with no restrictions by language or date were conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Studies were included for review if they used a longitudinal design (e.g. cohort studies, randomised controlled trials) and reported on the association between hypoglycaemia and changes over time in patient-reported outcomes related to QoL. Results In all, 20 longitudinal studies published between 1998 and 2020, representing 50,429 adults with type 2 diabetes, were selected for review. A descriptive synthesis following Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines indicated that self-treated symptomatic hypoglycaemia was followed by impairments in daily functioning along with elevated symptoms of generalised anxiety, diabetes distress and fear of hypoglycaemia. Severe hypoglycaemic events were associated with reduced confidence in diabetes self-management and lower ratings of perceived health over time. Frequent hypoglycaemia was followed by reduced energy levels and diminished emotional well-being. There was insufficient evidence, however, to conclude that hypoglycaemia impacted sleep quality, depressive symptoms, general mood, social support or overall diabetes-specific QoL. Conclusions Longitudinal evidence in this review suggests hypoglycaemia is a common occurrence among adults with type 2 diabetes that impacts key facets in the physical and psychological domains of QoL. Nonetheless, additional longitudinal research is needed—in particular, studies targeting diverse forms of hypoglycaemia, more varied facets of QoL and outcomes assessed using hypoglycaemia-specific measures

Unmet support needs relating to hypoglycaemia among adults with type 1 diabetes: Results of a multi‐country web‐based qualitative study

Objective Hypoglycaemic episodes and fear of hypoglycaemia can be burdensome for adults with type 1 diabetes. This study explored support needs relating to hypoglycaemia among adults with type 1 diabetes living in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Research design and methods Respondents participated in a web-based qualitative study involving four open-ended questions that asked what they wished other people understood about hypoglycaemia and what other people could do differently to support them with hypoglycaemia. Responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Participants were 219 adults with type 1 diabetes (mean ± SD age 39 ± 13 years; mean ± SD diabetes duration 20 ± 14 years). They described unmet needs relating to: (1) Clinical support, involving access to new diabetes technologies, training on hypoglycaemia prevention, personalised care and psychological support; (2) Practical support, involving family and friends better supporting them with hypoglycaemia management and prevention; (3) Education for other people, involving others becoming more informed about hypoglycaemia; and (4) An appreciation of the burden, involving others recognizing the experience and impact of episodes, and the burden of living with the risk of hypoglycaemia. Conclusions Adults with type 1 diabetes report several unmet support needs relating to hypoglycaemia. Service delivery should be person-centred and prioritise the individual's support needs. Clinical conversations are needed to identify the individual's support needs and develop tailored support plans. People with diabetes and their family members should be offered hypoglycaemia-specific education and training

Data on diabetes-specific distress are needed to improve the quality of diabetes care [Correspondence]

no abstract availabl

‘Never again will I be carefree’ : a qualitative study of the impact of hypoglycemia on quality of life among adults with type 1 diabetes

Introduction: Achieving glycemic targets and optimizing quality of life (QoL) are important goals of type 1 diabetes care. Hypoglycemia is a common barrier to achieving targets and can be associated with significant distress. However, the impact of hypoglycemia on QoL is not fully understood. The aim of this study was to explore how adults with type 1 diabetes are impacted by hypoglycemia in areas of life that are important to their overall QoL. Research design and methods: Participants responded to a web-based qualitative survey involving a novel ‘Wheel of Life’ activity. Responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: The final sample included 219 adults with type 1 diabetes from Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK. They had a mean±SD age of 39±13 years and diabetes duration of 20±14 years. Participants identified eight areas of life important to their overall QoL, including relationships and social life, work and studies, leisure and physical activity, everyday life, sleep, sex life, physical health, and mental health. Participants reported emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and social impacts of hypoglycemia within domains. Across domains, participants described interruptions, limited participation in activities, exhaustion, fear of hypoglycemia, compensatory strategies to prevent hypoglycemia, and reduced spontaneity. Conclusions: The findings emphasize the profound impact of hypoglycemia on QoL and diabetes self-care behaviors. Diabetes services should be aware of and address the burden of hypoglycemia to provide person-centered care. Clinicians could ask individuals how hypoglycemia affects important areas of their lives to better understand the personal impact and develop tailored management plans