Why the study?
The study was conducted to assess the status of diabetic distress among diabetic patients in referral hospitals of Amhara Regional State.
A high prevalence of moderate to high diabetic distress was observed among diabetic patients in Ethiopia, highlighting a significant psychological burden.
High diabetic distress prevalence may support screening integration in care; leaves open longitudinal studies on interventions and outcomes.
The main purpose of this study was to assess the status of diabetic distress among diabetic patients of referral hospitals in Amhara Regional State. Hospital-based cross-sectional survey was conducted on 346 participants. The participants of the study were selected using both probability and nonprobability sampling techniques. The instrument of the study was adapted and contextualized to the Ethiopian context to avoid cultural conflicts, and then it was rated and piloted. Both descriptive and inferential techniques were used to analyze the data. The cut-off for low, moderate, and high distress level was <2, 2–2.9, and ≥3, respectively. From a total of 346 sample patients, 54 (15.6%) had experienced no or little distress (1.54 ± .28), 162 (46.8%) had moderate distress (2.78 ± .82), and 130 (37.6%) had experienced high distress (3.94 ± .62). Statistically significant difference was observed in the level of diabetic distress with respect to age, F(2, 343) = 4.336, p < .05; marital status, F(2, 343) = 4.590, p < .05; educational status, F(5, 340) = 2.831, p < .05; and having habits of planned physical exercise, F(3, 245) = 2.911, p < .05. Statistically significant difference was not observed for sex, smoking habits, an experience of living with diabetics, and occupational status. The result of regression analysis shows that the independent variable altogether accounted for only 4.2% of the variance of diabetic distress. Diabetic distress was a serious psychological problem among diabetic patients in the referral hospitals of Amhara Region.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wolde et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: