Purpose The purpose of this study is to summarize recent literature on approaches to supporting healthy coping in diabetes, in two specific areas: 1) impact of different approaches to diabetes treatment on healthy coping; and 2) effectiveness of interventions specifically designed to support healthy coping. Methods A PubMed search identified 129 articles published August 1, 2006 – April 30, 2011, addressing diabetes in relation to emotion, quality of life, depression, adjustment, anxiety, coping, family therapy, behavior therapy, psychotherapy, problem-solving, couples therapy, or marital therapy. Results Evidence suggests that treatment choice may significantly influence quality of life, with treatment intensification in response to poor metabolic control often improving quality of life. The recent literature provides support for a variety of healthy coping interventions in diverse populations, including diabetes self-management education, support groups, problem-solving approaches, and coping skills interventions for improving a range of outcomes, Cognitive Behavior Therapy and collaborative care for treating depression, and family therapy for improving coping in youths. Conclusions Healthy coping in diabetes has received substantial attention in the past five years. A variety of approaches show positive results. Research is needed to compare effectiveness of different approaches in different populations and determine how to overcome barriers to intervention dissemination and implementation.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetes health care resource utilization (HCRU) studies tend to focus on patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or pool patients with T2D and type 1 diabetes (T1D). There is a paucity of recent data on the cost of treating patients with T1D in the United States.OBJECTIVES: To (a) estimate the per-patient per-year (PPPY) HCRU and costs, from a payer perspective, associated with treating U.S. adults with T1D and (b) compare these with the HCRU and costs for patients with T2D.METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used claims data from the Optum Clinformatics database between January 2015 and December 2017. Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a diagnosis of T1D were propensity scorematched to adults with T2D. Overall and nondiabetes-related HCRU and costs were assessed for T1D and T2D and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Propensity scores were used to match 10,103 patient pairs from T1D and T2D cohorts (mean ages 54.4 and 56.9 years, respectively). In the T1D cohort, inpatient, emergency department (ED), outpatient, and prescription claims occurred in 14.0%, 17.3%, 85.5%, and 100% of patients, respectively, resulting in a mean total cost of U.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract