Aims The second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2) study examined the experiences of family members of people with diabetes for benchmarking and identifying unmet needs or areas for improvement to assist family members and those with diabetes to effectively self-manage.Methods In total, 2057 family members of people with diabetes participated in an online, telephone or in-person survey designed to assess the impact of diabetes on family life, family support for people with diabetes and educational and community support.Results Supporting a relative with diabetes was perceived as a burden by 35.3% (range across countries 10.6-61.7%) of respondents. Over half of respondents [51.4% (22.5-76.0%)] rated their quality of life as 'good' or 'very good'. However, distress about the person with diabetes was high, with 61.3% (31.5-86.4%) worried about hypoglycaemia. The impact of diabetes on aspects of life was felt by 51.8% (46.9-58.6%). The greatest negative effect was on emotional well-being [44.6% (31.8-63.0%)], although depression was less common [11.6% (4.2-20.0%)]. Many respondents did not know how to help the person with diabetes [37.1% (17.5-53.0%)] and wanted to be more involved in their care [39.4% (15.5-61.7%)]. Participation in diabetes educational programmes was low [23.1% (9.4-43.3%)], although most of those who participated found them helpful [72.1% (42.1-90.3%)].Conclusions Diabetes has a negative impact on family members of people with diabetes. DAWN2 provides benchmarking indicators of family members' psychosocial needs that will help identify the support required for, and from, them to improve the lives of people with diabetes and their families.

When societies went into the COVID-19 lockdown, the conditions under which people with diabetes managed their illness dramatically changed. The present study explores experiences of everyday life during the COVID-19 lockdown among people with diabetes, and how diabetes self-management routines were affected. The data consist of 20 interviews with adults with diabetes, focusing on experiences during the COVID-19 lockdown. The analysis showed that experiences of self-management during lockdown were diverse and that participants handled daily life changes in very different ways. The main changes in self-management related to physical activity and food intake, which decreased and increased, respectively, for many participants during lockdown. We found two main and significantly different overall experiences of everyday life while on lockdown: (1) A daily life significantly changed by the lockdown, causing disruption of diabetes self-management routines, and (2) a largely unaffected everyday life, enabling continuance of diabetes routines. Our findings showed that people with diabetes lacked information about strategies to self-manage diabetes during lockdown and would have benefited from guidance and support throughout the pandemic, or any other crisis, to maintain their diabetes self-management routines.

Our study emphasizes the complex relationships between patient activation, distress and behaviour, specific treatment modalities and glycaemic control. Knowledge of treatment goals, achieving patient activation in coping with diabetes, and lowering disease-related emotional stress are important patient education goals. However, the large unexplained component of HbA(1c) variance highlights the need for more research to understand the mechanisms of glycaemic control.

Objectives:Obesity and dyslipidemia are risk factors for ischemic heart disease, and prevention and treatment in primary care can reduce these risks. The objective of this cost-effectiveness analysis was to compare the costs and effects (in terms of life years gained) of providing nutritional counseling by a general practitioner (GP) or a dietician.Methods:A total of 60 GPs, who accepted to participate, were randomized either to give nutritional counseling or to refer patients to a dietician for counseling. The life years gained was estimated using a Cox regression model. Costs were estimated on the basis of registered use of time (dieticians) or agreed salaries (GPs).Results:The effect of nutritional counseling comparing GPs and dieticians is greatest when counseling is performed by a GP—0.0919 years versus 0.0274 years. These effects appear to be moderate, but they are significant. It is also proven that the GP group was the most cost-effective—the cost of gaining 1 extra life year was estimated to be 8,213 DKK compared with the dietician group, for which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated to be 59,987 DKK.Conclusions:The effects were moderate, but other studies of other patient groups and interventions report effects within the same magnitude. The GP group was the most cost-effective, but it must be concluded that both counseling strategies were relatively cost-effective. Even though the cost of gaining an extra life year was estimated to be 59,987 DKK in the dietician group, this might be an acceptable price.

GPs were aware of substantial risk factors of cardiovascular disease and addressed these when counselling. The guidance from a GP was of significant importance for risk reduction in relation to IHD. However, a long-term lifestyle intervention by GP was difficult to implement. In the case of obesity it was effective to refer to long-term nutritional counselling by a dietician.