Understanding the preferences of young adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus with regard to diabetes self-management education: a qualitative study.

AIM: Young-onset type 2 diabetes (YOD) is associated with poorer clinical outcomes. To support the development of more effective diabetes self-management education (DSME) programmes, this study aimed to understand the preferences of young adults with YOD in relation to the modality, content and qualities of DSME. METHODS: Maximal variation sampling was employed to recruit participants of varied age, ethnicity and marital status. In-depth interviews using a semistructured questionnaire were conducted. Subsequently, thematic analysis with coding and conceptualisation of data was applied to identify the main themes regarding DSME. RESULTS: 21 young adult participants aged 22-39 years were interviewed from three polyclinics in Singapore. The most used modalities for DSME included education from healthcare providers, information and support from family and friends and information from internet sources. Participants were most interested in information regarding diet, age-specific diabetes-related conditions and medication effects. Additionally, participants valued DSME that was credible, accessible, individualised and empathetic. Conversely, absence of the above qualities and stigma hindered participants from receiving DSME. CONCLUSION: Our study explored the preferences of young adults with YOD with regard to DSME, identifying the most used modalities, preferred content and qualities that were valued by young adults. Our findings will help inform the development of DSME programmes that can better meet the needs and preferences of young adults with YOD.

Prevalence and risk factors of depression and anxiety in primary care.

Introduction: Anxiety and depressive disorders are highly prevalent mental health conditions worldwide. However, little is known about their specific prevalence in primary care settings. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of depression and anxiety in the primary care population and identify associated patient characteristics. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional study using stratified sampling by age with a self-administered questionnaire survey in Singapore's National Health-care Group Polyclinics from December 2021 to April 2022. A total score of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) ≥10 represents clinical depression, and a total score of Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) ≥10 indicates clinical anxiety. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with depression and anxiety. Results: A total of 5694 patients were approached and 3505 consented to the study (response rate=61.6%). There was a higher prevalence of coexisting clinical depression and anxiety (DA) (prevalence=5.4%) compared to clinical depression only (3.3%) and clinical anxiety only (1.9%). The odds of having DA were higher among those aged 21-39 years (odds ratio [OR] 13.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.41-33.64) and 40-64 years (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.03-5.03) compared to those ≥65 years. Women had higher odds of having DA (OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.54-3.50) compared to men. Respondents with diabetes had higher odds of having DA (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.07-2.94) compared to those without diabetes. Conclusion: Coexisting clinical depression and anxiety are significantly present in the primary care setting, especially among younger individuals, patients with diabetes and women. Mental health screening programmes should include screening for both depression and anxiety, and target these at-risk groups.

How family physicians in Singapore recognise complexity during consultations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of persons with complex needs in Singapore is rising. Poor understanding of what constitutes complexity impedes the identification of care gaps and development of interventions to improve care for these individuals. We aim to identify the characteristics contributing to complexity in primary care, from the Family Physicians' (FP) perspectives. METHODS: Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted from January to September 2021 with experienced FPs across 14 study sites, employing a qualitative descriptive approach based on a complexity framework. Data were coded independently and categorised using thematic analysis by two independent investigators. RESULTS: Five FGDs were conducted with 18 FPs aged 32 to 57 years old working in different primary care settings, with a mean of 13.5 years of primary care experience. Participants emphasised the need for a unified definition of complexity. Complexity is characterised by the presence of issues spanning across two or more domains (medical, psychological, social or behavioural) that adversely impact medical care and outcomes. Persons with complex needs contrast with persons with medically difficult issues. Medical domain issues include the number of active medical problems, poor chronic disease control, treatment interactions, ill-defined symptoms, management of end-of-life conditions and functional impairment. Psychological domain issues include the presence of mental health conditions or cognitive impairment. Social domain issues include the lack of social support, competing social responsibilities and financial issues, while behavioural domain issues include a lack of trust in healthcare workers, fixed health beliefs and poor health literacy. CONCLUSION: Recognising the medical, psychological, social and behavioural factors that contribute to complexity aids in discerning the diverse needs of individuals with complex needs. This underscores the need for additional support in these pertinent areas.