Quality of life and its association with insomnia and clinical variables in type 2 diabetes

Abstract

Background: There is a significant increase in number of patients with type II diabetes, Quality of Life (QOL) has become a major concern. Insomnia associated with diabetes may also influence QOL in these patients. Aim: This cross sectional comparative study aims to assess QOL and its determinants inpatients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). It also explored the prevalence and association of insomnia with QOL in T2DM patients. Materials and Methods: The sample size comprised of 50 patients with T2DM and equal number of healthy control. Socio demographic and disease characteristics were recorded on a specially designed Performa. QOL and insomnia were assessed on WHOQOL-BREEF and ISI, respectively. Results: The mean age of participants was 48.25 ± 19.05 years and the mean duration of illness was 5.64± 2.35 years. QOL was significantly impaired in all the four domains of WHOQOLBREF (p<0.05). Female genders, poor glycemic control, longer duration of disease, increased BMI were associated with poor QOL. Insomnia was more common in diabetics [Odds Ratio (95% C. I.=8.566 (3.321 to 22.094)] and had significant association with poor QOL. Conclusions: QOL in patients with T2DM is impaired. Several disease characteristics have negative influence on QOL in these patients. Frequent occurrence of insomnia may further deteriorate the QOL.It is important to understand risk factors associated with poor QOL to formulate appropriate treatment strategy.

A cross-sectional study of the relationship between quality of life and sleep quality in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus

“…QOL has been reported to be worse in a group of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) that maintained a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentration of approximately 9% than that in a group that maintained an HbA1c concentration of approximately 7% [1]. In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), insufficient blood glucose control was reported to be related to a poor QOL [2,3]. Since the evaluation of QOL depends on the subjectivity of the patient, its assessment requires measurement and quantification using scales with reliability and validity that have been confirmed by econometric methods and statistical analysis.…”

Understanding the relationship between sleep and quality of life in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of the literature

“…Eight studies investigated the impact of sleep disorders on QoL ( Bironneau et al, 2017 ; Daniele et al, 2013 ; Gabric et al, 2018 ; Hashimoto et al, 2020 ; Jain et al, 2017 ; Merlino et al, 2010 ; Modarresnia et al, 2018 ; Naranjo et al, 2020 ). Hashimoto et al (2020) reported that patients with sleep disorders scored significantly lower across several dimensions of QoL ( p < 0.001).…”

“…Only one study assessed the impact of insomnia on QoL in T2D patients ( Jain et al, 2017 ). Jain et al (2017) reported that patients with insomnia scored lower than those without insomnia on all four domains of QoL, including physical and psychological health and social relationships. These findings were statistically significant for all domains ( p < 0.01).…”

“…We also found evidence of a direct relationship between sleep and QoL in this patient cohort. The presence and severity of sleep disorders like RLS, OSA and insomnia was associated with lower scores across several HRQoL domains in T2D patients ( Bironneau et al, 2017 ; Daniele et al, 2013 ; Jain et al, 2017 ; Merlino et al, 2010 ; Modarresnia et al, 2018 ). Gabric et al (2018) also found evidence of a predictive relationship between sleep and QoL.…”

“…Included studies derived from several different countries and across continents, including North and South America, Europe and Asia, which increases the generalizability of findings across cultures. While there was considerable heterogeneity across outcome measures, all scales were validated and reliably assessed QoL among patients and in clinical practice ( Jacobson et al, 1994 ; Jain et al, 2017 ; Ware and Sherbourne, 1992 ), which can elicit generalizability of findings. A further strength of the current review is the methodology, which involved the adoption of a dual screening and quality appraisal process.…”