Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study was conducted to examine the effect of attitude to death on self-management in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was carried out in a descriptive and correlational type with the participation of n = 103 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients registered in the Internal Medicine Unit at a University Hospital. Personal Information Form, Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R), Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire and Fear of COVID-19 Scale were used in data collection. According to the results of the study, it was determined that diabetes patients' fear of COVID-19 increased their fear of death and self-management. Similarly, neuropathy and nephropathy developed in these patients. In addition, it was determined that the diabetic patients who worked 6–7 days a week outside the home had higher levels of fear. It was found that those with high fear were more attentive to social distancing, wearing masks and hand sanitizer use. Staying at home is also not always possible for patients with chronic diseases, and people struggle with COVID-19 by working in crowded workspaces. It is necessary to recognize the struggle of patients with chronic diseases and provide social, economic and psychological support.

Keywords

attitude to death COVID-19 self-management type 2 diabetes mellitus

Achieving metabolic control of Diabetes Mellitus (DM), management of acute and chronic complications, increasing quality of life and comfort are possible with effective self-management (Hosseinzadeh et al., 2020; Pamungkas & Chamroonsawasdi, 2020). In this context, educated diabetic patients stay safer. Diabetes education is a well-accepted and effective practice that has been in the literature since ancient times. It has been actively used in clinical processes with proven positive results, and it improves self-management (Tanaka et al., 2020). Evidence that this patient group performs self-management well is the measurement results obtained to ensure optimal glycemic control (HbA1c, <7%) (Gao et al., 2020).

COVID-19 is a deadly disease emerging in Wuhan, China towards the end of 2019, and it has caused a global pandemic and continues to have its crushing effects (Pleasure et al., 2020; World Health Organization, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). Patients with diabetes are especially hypersensitive to lung infections since their immune systems are weakened. Disease factors can be viral, bacterial and fungal pathogens. Also, the suppression of the immune system due to intensive treatment protocols makes patients susceptible to infections (Couch et al., 1997; Huang et al., 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic, which is on the rise especially in winter, gives an idea that patients with diabetes should be more protected.

Lung infections can have life-threatening or fatal consequences for people with diabetes. In the literature, it was stated that 20.3% of deaths caused by SARS-CoV-1 are patients with more than one comorbidity (Glass et al., 2004). COVID-19 leads to extremely important and terrifying consequences worldwide. Diabetic patients are at risk for COVID-19 due to a weak immune system, increased catabolism and high stress, and the course of the infection can be fatal.

Knowledge and awareness about the negative effects of COVID-19 are increasing day by day, with the impact of both press and social media. Therefore, patients with diabetes are also aware that exposure to COVID-19 can be fatal, and this may cause fear. Having a high level of fear and stress is a negative experience that gives rise to the thought of the death probability (Kapısız & Eker, 2018). Fear is a universal response to a perceived threat in people with various problems and dangers (Alvi et al., 2009). It disrupts the individual's well-being and causes emotional, physiological, and physical reactions. Fear brings about depression, anxiety and delay in wound healing in individuals and requires additional medication use (Ralph & Viljoen, 2018).

The most severe form of fear is called the fear of death (Alvi et al., 2009; Ralph & Viljoen, 2018). The physiologic balance of diabetic patients, predisposed to deteriorating, can be harmed by fear alone, even without ever being infected with the COVID-19, and this is thought to affect self-management. In this study, it was aimed to examine the effect of attitude to death on disease self-management in patients with type 2 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Material and Method

This study was conducted in a descriptive, cross-sectional and correlational type to examine the relationship between Type 2 Diabetes patients' attitude to death and disease self-management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Research Design and Participants

This study was carried out with the participation of the patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were treated in the Internal Medicine Unit and outpatient clinic of Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University Research and Practice Hospital. This study was conducted with patients with T2DM who visited the Internal Diseases unit and outpatient clinic and accepted to participate in the study within a month after ethical approval, without using the sampling method. The data were collected by the researcher using face-to-face interviews with the patients. The data collection form was filled out by reading to the patients and marking the answers on the form by the researcher.

Inclusion Criteria

i. Being diagnosed with T2DM,

ii. Being 18 years or older,

iii. Not having any communication barriers,

iv. Agreeing to participate in the study.

Exclusion Criteria

i. Not being diagnosed with T2DM,

ii. Patients under the age of 18,

iii. Being diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, non-Turkish speakers, having a communication barrier

iv. Not being willing to participate in the study.

Data Collection Tools

In the study, “Personal Information Form”, “Death Attitude Profile-Revised”, “Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire” and “Fear of COVID-19 Scale” were used as data collection tools. Information about the scales is presented below.

Death Attitude Profile-Revised

The Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R) was developed by Wong (1994) to assess individuals' attitudes towards death (Wong, 1994). Its Turkish validity and reliability were performed by Işık Abalı (Işık Abalı, 2008). The scale is 32-item, multi-dimensional and Likert-type and is scored as strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (7). There are 5 sub-scales in the scale. These are fear of death, death avoidance, neutral acceptance, approach acceptance and escape acceptance. The internal consistency reliability coefficient was 0.81 for the sum scale, 0.86 for neutral acceptance and approach acceptance subscales, 0.74 for escape acceptance, and 0.76 for fear of death and death avoidance. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha value for the sum scale was found to be 0.91.

Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire

This scale is a 16-item individual assessment scale developed by Schmitt et al. in 2013 to examine the relationship of diabetic patients to diabetes self-management and glycemic control (Schmitt et al., 2013). Turkish validity and reliability were performed by Eroğlu and Sabuncu (2018). Participants were asked to answer the questions by considering their situation for the last 8 weeks. In the validity and reliability study conducted with 261 diabetic patients, the Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be 0.84.

In the study, Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ) was adapted to Turkish society, and the Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be 0.85. The scale consists of 4 sub-scales.

Glucose Management: Items 1, 4, 6, 10, 12 (4th and 12th items are related to drug utilization, 1st, 6th and 10th items are related to blood glucose monitoring).

Dietary Control: Items 2, 5, 9, 13

Physical Activity: Items 8, 11, 15

Health-care Use: Items 3, 7, 14

Item 16 is not included in any sub-scale, included in sum scale only.

The rating scale was designed as a four-point Likert scale with the response options ‘applies to me very much’ (3 points), ‘applies to me to a considerable degree’ (2 points), ‘applies to me to some degree’ (1 point), and ‘does not apply to me’ (0 points).

DSMQ Scale Scoring (16 Items): The DSMQ scale consists of 16 items, and 7 of these items are formulated positively and 9 inversely. The scores of the items numbered “5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16” in the scale are formulated inversely.

Scale scoring: (Total item score of the total scale or sub-scale)/(The maximum total item score that can be obtained from the total scale or sub-scale) x10). For unanswered questions, 3 points are reduced from the maximum total item score that can be obtained from the total scale or sub-scale. In the scale, a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 10 points are scored. If an item is omitted, it is evaluated as -3 points. As the points received approach 10, diabetes self-management increases. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha value for the sum scale was found to be 0.87.

Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S)

It was developed by Ahorsu et al. (2020) to measure individuals' fear levels caused by COVID-19 (Ahorsu et al., 2020). The items of the scale were created based on a comprehensive review of existing scales on fear, expert evaluations, and participant interviews. The Turkish adaptation of the scale was performed by Satici et al., and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for internal consistency was found to be 0.84 (Satici et al., 2020).

This is a unidimensional 7-item and 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 5 = Strongly agree). There is no reversed item on the scale. Internal consistency of the scale was found to be 0.82 and test-retest reliability was 0.72. High scores on the scale indicate that fear of COVID-19 is high. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha value was found to be 0.90.

Statistical Analysis

After the data were coded by the researchers, data analysis was performed by using IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) Statistics 25. Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis of the data. T-test, ANOVA analysis, correlation and regression analysis were performed to determine the relationship between scales and descriptive features. Bonferroni test was used to determine the difference in multiple comparisons. The scale reliability coefficient was determined in Cronbach's Alpha. 95% confidence interval and p-value less than .05 were taken into account in the evaluation of the obtained results.

Ethics

Prior to the start of the study, the requisite legal approvals will be obtained from Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University Ethics Committee (Decision No: 83116987–189). The Volunteer Information Form was read by the researcher by informing the patients about the research in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Patients volunteering to take part in the study were included in the study after their verbal consent.

Results

The characteristics of the diabetes patients and the mean scores obtained from the scales in this study are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Characteristics of Patients With Diabetes and Mean Scores of DAP-R, DSMQ and FCV-19S (n = 103).

			DAP-R		DSMQ		FCV-19S
Characteristics	n	%	Mean ± SD	Test	Mean±SD	Test	Mean ± SD	Test
BMI
18.5–24.9	15	14.6	121.43 ± 4.74	F = 0.65	7.33 ± 0.43	F = 0.183	29.13 ± 2.99	F = 1.783
25–29.99	59	57.3	122.20 ± 4.31	p = .938	7.36 ± 0.50	p = .833	29.86 ± 2.53	p = .173
30–39.99	29	28.2	122.13 ± 4.65		7.29 ± 0.56		30.68 ± 2.89
Gender
Female	53	51.5	123.07 ± 4.44	t = 2.147	7.34 ± 0.45	t = 0.173	30.13 ± 2.59	t = 0.541
Male	50	48.5	121.14 ± 4.70	p = .034*	7.32 ± 0.57	p = .863	29.84 ± 2.88	p = .590
Marital status
Married	92	89.3	122.58 ± 4.36	t = 2.951	7.32 ± 0.52	t=−0.589	29.78 ± 2.65	t=−2.280
Single	11	10.7	118.36 ± 5.44	p = .004**	7.42 ± 0.32	p = .557	31.72 ± 2.83	p = .025**
Education
Literate	15	14.6	121.13 ± 5.04		7.29 ± 0.56		31.86 ± 2.06
Primary school	33	32.0	122.06 ± 5.37	F = 1.258	7.36 ± 0.56	F = 1.389	30.33 ± 2.13	F = 5.688
High school	36	35.0	121.69 ± 3.77	p = .293	7.43 ± 0.49	p = .251	29.77 ± 3.09	p = .001**
Associate degree and above	19	18.4	123.89 ± 4.39		7.14 ± 0.36		28.31 ± 2.42
Occupation
Worker	24	23.3	123.50 ± 4.80		7.45 ± 0.47		28.75 ± 2.15
Civil servant	30	29.1	121.83 ± 5.09	F = 1.993	7.33 ± 0.42	F = 0.532	28.90 ± 2.90	F = 7.991
Business owner	6	5.8	125.33 ± 4.17	p = .102	7.18 ± 0.34	p = .003**	32.66 ± 1.63	p = .000**
Retired	33	32	120.81 ± 3.92		7.28 ± 0.61		31.45 ± 2.13
Unemployed	10	9.7	122.20 ± 4.41		7.33 ± 0.55		29.80 ± 2.61
Ways of Working
Work-from-home/home office	43	41.7	121.13 ± 4.03	F = 4.243p = .007**	7.29 ± 0.59	F = 0.847p = .006**	29.06 ± 2.33	F = 4.835p = .003**
2 days a week outside the home	10	9.7	121.90 ± 4.62		7.20 ± 0.40		28.40 ± 2.50
3–5 days a week outside the home	29	28.2	121.48 ± 5.20		7.34 ± 0.41		29.17 ± 2.82
6–7 days a week outside the home	21	20.4	125.19 ± 4.09		7.48 ± 0.48		31.66 ± 2.76
Income status
Income < expenses	33	32.0	123.15 ± 3.94	F = 1.339	7.31 ± 0.60	F = 0.124	29.48 ± 2.70	F = 1.175
Income = expenses	44	42.7	121.90 ± 4.24	p = .267	7.36 ± 0.45	p = .884	30.02 ± 2.82	p = .313
Income > expenses	26	25.2	121.23 ± 5.92		7.31 ± 0.48		30.57 ± 2.56
Smoking
Yes	21	20.4	122.04 ± 4.96	t=−0.097	7.26 ± 0.42	t=−0.765	30.19 ± 2.63	t = 0.375
No	82	79.6	122.15 ± 4.60	p = .923	7.35 ± 0.53	p = .446	29.93 ± 2.76	p = .708
Alcohol consumption
Social drinker	13	12.6	121.15 ± 5.74	t=−0.813	7.51 ± 0.37	t = 1.347	29.38 ± 2.21	t=−0.885
Addicted	90	87.4	122.27 ± 4.49	p = .418	7.31 ± .52	p = .181	30.07 ± 2.79	p = .394
Wearing a mask
Yes	91	88.3	122.28 ± 4.83	t = 0.899	7.32 ± 0.50	t=−0.916	30.31 ± 2.59	t = 3.551
No	12	11.7	121.00 ± 2.82	p = .371	7.46 ± 0.54	p = .362	27.50 ± 2.54	p = .001**
Use of disinfectants
Yes	89	86.4	122.28 ± 4.91	t = 0.796	7.31 ± 0.50	t=−1.278	30.30 ± 2.57	t = 3.054
No	14	13.6	121.21 ± 2.29	p = .428	7.50 ± 0.52	p = .02*	28.00 ± 2.90	p = .003**
Social distancing
Yes	77	74.8	121.84 ± 4.88	t=−1.096	7.35 ± 0.51	t = 0.443	30.37 ± 2.65	t = 2.539
No	26	25.2	123.00 ± 3.83	p = .276	7.29 ± 0.51	p = .659	28.84 ± 2.66	p = .013**
	Mean±SD		r	p	r	p	r	p
Age	50.12 + 12.32		−.323	.001	.054	.591	.473	.000
Height	167.05 + 9.13		−.157	.113	.002	.984	−.050	.614
Weight (Kg)	79.76 + 10.16		−.108	.279	−.018	.854	.108	.277

*p < .05, **p < .01.

F=ANOVA; t=Independent sample test; DAP-R = Death Attitude Profile-Revised; DSMQ = Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire; FCV-19S = Fear of COVID-19 Scale; SD = Standard deviation; BMI = Body Mass Index.

The characteristics of the patients with diabetes participating in this study are shown in Table 1. The average age of these patients was determined to be 50.12 ± 12.32. When the BMI of the patients is examined, it is seen that 57.3% of them are overweight in the range of 25–29.99. It was determined that 51.5% of the patients were female, 89.3% were married, 35% were high school graduates, 32% were retired, 41.7% were working from home every day, 42% of them had balance between their expenses and income, 79.6% did not smoke, 87.4% considered themselves as addicted to alcohol, and during the COVID-19, 88.3% wore a mask, 86.4% used disinfectant, and 74.8% practiced social distancing (Table 1).

When the mean scores obtained from the scales were examined, it was determined that the DAP-R mean score for the women was 123.07 + 4.44, for married women 122.58 + 4.36, and 125.19 + 4.09 for those who worked 6–7 days a week outside the home. It was determined that those who worked outside for 6–7 days a week had a higher fear of death than those who worked from home (p = .007). Similarly, it was determined that married people had a higher fear of death than singles (p = .004) and women had a higher fear of death than men (p = .034).

Considering DSMQ, self-management of civil servants and workers was found to be higher (p < .01). Similarly, those who work 6–7 days a week outside the home (p = .006) and use disinfectants (p = .02) were found to have higher diabetes self-management than other individuals.

When the Fear of COVID-19 Scale scores of the participants were examined, the scores of those who constantly worked from home were higher than the others (p = .003), and the scores of those who used masks and disinfectants and paid more attention to social distancing were found to be higher than the others (p < .01).

Table 2 contains information about the health status of patients with diabetes and the mean scores obtained from the scales. It was determined that the patients were followed up for an average of 16.71 ± 9.40 years with the diagnosis of diabetes, the mean HbA1C was 5.69 ± 1.31, the mean FBG was 116.27 ± 25.61 and the mean PBG was 146.33 ± 26.60. It was determined that 51.5% of diabetic patients used oral anti-diabetic drugs, 54.4% followed the diet, 70.9% did not exercise, 88.3% received training about diabetes from health professionals, and 80.6% gave regular blood. Considering the presence of complications, 5.8% had retinopathy, 14.6% had nephropathy, 20.4% had neuropathy, 12.6% had cardiovascular disease, 8.7% had cerebrovascular disease, 3.9% had diabetic foot, 11.7% had peripheral vascular disease (Table 2).

Table 2.

Comparison of Diabetes Patients’ Health Information With the Mean Scores of the DAP-R, DSMQ and FCV-19S (n = 103).

			DAP-R		DSMQ		FCV-19S
Health information	n	%	Mean ± SD	Test	Mean±SD	Test	Mean±SD	Test
Use of insulin
Oral	53	51.5	122.24 ± 4.17	t = 0.244	7.33 ± 0.54	t = 0.013	30.11 ± 2.66	t = 0.469
Subcutaneous	50	48.5	122.02 ± 5.15	p = .807	7.33 ± 0.47	p = 0.989	29.86 ± 2.81	p = 0.640
Dietary compliance
Yes	56	54.4	121.42 ± 4.56	t=−1.700	7.38 ± 0.49	t = 1.083	30.33 ± 2.57	t = 1.424
No	47	45.6	122.97 ± 4.66	p = .092	7.27 ± 0.52	p = 0.281	29.57 ± 2.87	p = 0.157
Regular exercise
Yes	30	29.1	119.76 ± 4.62	t=−3.490	7.38 ± 0.38	t = 0.555	31.20 ± 2.63	t = 2.996
No	73	70.9	123.10 ± 4.32	p = .001**	7.32 ± 0.55	p = 0.580	29.49 ± 2.62	p = .003**
Diabetes education
Yes	91	88.3	122.42 ± 4.59	t = 1.776	7.34 ± 0.52	t = 0.334	29.92 ± 2.68	t=−0.687
No	12	11.7	119.91 ± 4.66	p = .079	7.29 ± 0.36	p = .739	30.50 ± 3.11	p = .494
Regular blood donation
Yes	83	80.6	122.45 ± 4.73	t = 1.438	7.35 ± 0.53	t = 0.553	29.69 ± 2.60	t=−2.253
No	20	19.4	120.80 ± 4.16	p = .154	7.28 ± 0.39	p = .581	31.20 ± 2.96	p = .026**
Retinopathy
Yes	6	5.8	121.50 ± 6.68	t=−0.343	7.43 ± 0.34	t = 0.454	32.00 ± 2.82	t = 1.883
No	97	94.2	122.17 ± 4.54	p = .732	7.33 ± 0.52	p = .651	29.86 ± 2.68	p = .063
Nephropathy
Yes	15	14.6	122.06 ± 6.40	t=−1.887	7.38 ± 0.30	t = 0.414	31.93 ± 2.60	t = 3.109
No	88	85.4	120.48 ± 4.23	p = .062	7.32 ± 0.53	p = .680	29.65 ± 2.62	p = .002**
Neuropathy
Yes	21	20.4	122.57 ± 4.80	t=−1.744	7.39 ± 0.57	t = 0.528	31.71 ± 2.30	t = 3.411
No	82	79.6	120.53 ± 4.55	p = .084	7.32 ± 0.49	p = .599	29.54 ± 2.66	p = .001**
CVD
Yes	13	12.6	123.84 ± 4.12	t = 1.425	7.35 ± 0.49	t = 0.132	30.15 ± 2.79	t = 0.230
No	90	87.4	121.88 ± 4.69	p = .005*	7.33 ± 0.51	p = .895	29.96 ± 2.77	p = .008**
Cerebrovascular disease
Yes	9	8.7	122.22 ± 3.27	t = 0.058	7.06 ± 0.56	t=−1.725	30.88 ± 2.80	t = 1.035
No	94	91.3	122.12 ± 4.77	p = .954	7.36 ± 0.50	p = .088	29.90 ± 2.72	p = .303
Diabetic foot
Yes	4	3.9	124.25 ± 2.98	t=−1.720	7.34 ± 0.35	t = 0.022	32.75 ± 2.21	t=−0.927
No	99	96.1	118.29 ± 4.64	p = .008**	7.33 ± 0.51	p = .982	30.04 ± 2.74	p = .003
PVD
Yes	12	11.7	122.91 ± 4.42	t = 0.617	6.89 ± 0.49	t=−3.375	29.58 ± 2.87	t=−0.548
No	91	88.3	122.03 ± 4.69	p = .539	7.39 ± 0.48	p = .001**	30.04 ± 2.71	p = .585
	Mean ± SD		r	P	r	p	r	p
Diabetes history**	16.71 ± 9.40		−.430	.000	.103	.145	.363	.000**
HbA₁C (%)	5.69 ± 1.31		.177	.073	.096	.337	−.052	.605
FBS	116.27 ± 25.61		−.275	.005	.113	.257	.230	.020
PPG	146.33 ± 26.60		−.162	.102	.160	.107	.097	.329

t; independent sample t-test; DAP-R = Death Attitude Profile-Revised; DSMQ = Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire; FCV-19S = Fear of COVID-19 Scale; FBG = Fasting blood glucose; PBG = Postprandial blood glucose; PVD = Peripheral vascular disease; SD = Standard deviation; *** = Displayed in years; HbA₁C = Glycated hemoglobin; CVD = Cardiovascular disease; SVH = Cerebrovascular disease.

*p < .05, **p < .01.

It was determined that those who exercised regularly, those who had more diabetes history and those with neuropathy and nephropathy had higher fear of COVID-19 death (p < .01). Similarly, it was determined that those without PVD had better diabetes self-management (p < .01). In our study, both the fear of death and the fear of COVID-19 were found to be statistically higher in patients with CVD than the others (p < .01). The fear of COVID-19 in diabetic patients with neuropathy and nephropathy was statistically higher than the others (p < .01).

Table 3 contains information about the mean scores of the total and subscales of the scales. The patients scored an average of 29.99 + 2.72 points on the Fear of COVID-19 Scale. In DAP-R, the lowest score was taken from the subscales of escape acceptance (20.62 ± 2.82), the highest score from neutral acceptance and approach acceptance (53.93 ± 3.18). The mean total score of the DAP-R was 122.13 ± 4.65. The highest score on the Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire was taken from the health-care use subscale (8.72 + 1.09), and the second highest score was taken from the glucose management subscale (7.98 ± 0.78). The mean DSMQ total score was found to be 7.33 ± 0.51.

Table 3.

DAP-R, DSMQ and FCV-19S Score Averages (n = 103).

Total and sub-scales	Item number	Items	Score range	Min.-Max.	Mean ± SD
Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) Total	7	(12,34,567)	7–35	23–35	29.99 + 2.72
Neutral Acceptance and Approach Acceptance	12	(468,121,314,151,921,222,325)	12–84	44–61	53.93 ± 3.18
Escape Acceptance	5	(5,91,12,024)	5–35	14–27	20.62 ± 2.82
Fear of Death and Death Avoidance	9	(1,23,71,01,61,71,826)	9–63	40–55	47.58 ± 3.37
Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R) Total	26	(1,234,567,891,011,121,314,151,617,181,920,212,223,242,526)	26–182	110–132	122.13 ± 4.65
Glucose Management	5	(14,61,012)	0–10	6.00–9.33	7.98 ± 0.78
Dietary Control	4	(25,913)	0–10	1.67–8.33	5.70 ± 1.28
Physical Activity	3	(81,115)	0–10	3.33–8.89	6.56 ± 1.32
Health-care Use	3	(3, 7, 14)	0–10	5.56–10	8.72 ± 1.09
Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ) Total	16	(12,345,678,910,111,213,141,516)	0–10	5.21–8.54	7.33 ± 0.51

In Figure 1, the comparison of the total scores of the scales is schematized. Accordingly, diabetes self-management and fear of COVID-19 and attitude towards death are affected by each other. Fear of death and COVID-19 trigger each other, and diabetes self-management increases with the effect of both.

Figure 1.

Mean Score Comparison of DAP-R, DSMQ and FCV-19S.

According to the regression analysis, diabetes self-management predictors are shown in Table 4. Accordingly, it is seen that the first predictor of self-management is PVD (10%) and has a significant effect (p < .001). It was determined that the predictors of PVD, fear of death, nephropathy, and ways of working had a significant effect on the Glucose Management subscale by 21% (p = .000). Nephropathy, PVD, diabetic foot and ways of working predictors affect the Dietary Control subscale by 19% (p < .001). The predictors of escape acceptance, Diabetic foot, DAP-R, occupation and weight affect the Physical Activity subscale by 27% (p < .001). The predictors of diabetes education from professional health workers, fear of death and smoking affect the Health-care Use subscale by 14% (p < .001).

Table 4.

Diabetes Self-Management Predictors According to Regression Analysis (n = 103).

			Unstandardized coefficients		Standardized coefficients	Items
		Model	B	Std. error	Beta	t	p	F	Sig.	R²
Self-management	1	(Constant)	30.661	1.371		22.358	.000	11.388	.001^a	.101
Self-management		PVD*	2.422	.718	.318	3.375	.001
Glucose Management	1	(Constant)	6.830	.445		15.333	.000	6.939	.010^a	.064
		PVD	.614	.233	.254	2.634	.010
	2	(Constant)	9.295	1.163		7.992	.000	6.228	.003^b	.111
		PVD	.572	.229	.236	2.494	.014
		Fear of Death	−.050	.022	−.216	−2.286	.024
	3	(Constant)	8.819	1.139		7.743	.000	6.996	.000^c	.175
		PVD	.601	.222	.248	2.704	.008
		Fear of Death	−.064	.022	−.275	−2.922	.004
		Nephropathy	.574	.207	.260	2.775	.007
	4	(Constant)	9.021	1.123		8.030	.000	6.553	.000^d	.211
		PVD	.625	.219	.258	2.861	.005
		Fear of Death	−.076	.022	−.330	−3.438	.001
		Nephropathy	.612	.204	.278	3.001	.003
		Ways of working	.128	.061	.198	2.118	.037
Dietary Control	1	(Constant)	7.432	.657		11.319	.000	7.177	.009^e	.066
		Nephropathy	−.932	.348	−.258	−2.679	.009
	2	(Constant)	5.656	.984		5.746	.000	6.588	.002^f	.116
		Nephropathy	−.880	.341	−.243	−2.582	.011
		PVD	.892	.375	.224	2.381	.019
	3	(Constant)	2.916	1.549		1.882	.063	6.275	.001^g	.160
		Nephropathy	−.921	.334	−.255	−2.755	.007
		PVD	.950	.368	.239	2.580	.011
		t	1.381	.611	.209	2.260	.026
	4	(Constant)	2.443	1.543		1.583	.117	5.879	.000^h	.194
		Nephropathy	−.903	.329	−.250	−2.740	.007
		PVD	.999	.363	.251	2.751	.007
		Diabetic foot	1.330	.602	.201	2.208	.030
		Ways of working	.196	.097	.184	2.025	.046
Physical Activity	1	(Constant)	9.198	.932		9.872	.000	8.107	.005^ı	.074
		Escape acceptance	−.127	.045	−.273	−2.847	.005
	2	(Constant)	12.284	1.550		7.925	.000	7.278	.001ⁱ	.127
		Escape acceptance	−.128	.044	−.275	−2.940	.004
		Diabetic foot	−1.563	.636	−.230	−2.459	.016
	3	(Constant)	5.470	3.251		1.683	.096	6.947	.000^j	.174
		Escape acceptance	−.153	.044	−.327	−3.482	.001
		Diabetic foot	−1.826	.631	−.268	−2.892	.005
		DAP-R**	.064	.027	.226	2.369	.020
	4	(Constant)	3.582	3.225		1.111	.269	7.415	.000^l	.232
		Escape acceptance	−.176	.043	−.376	−4.052	.000
		Diabetic foot	−1.825	.612	−.268	−2.982	.004
		DAP-R	.078	.027	.275	2.920	.004
		Occupation	.239	.088	.249	2.731	.007
	5	(Constant)	.809	3.381		.239	.811	7.240	.000^k	.272
		Escape acceptance	−.192	.043	−.410	−4.452	.000
		Diabetic foot	−1.975	.603	−.290	−3.277	.001
		DAP-R	.088	.027	.311	3.324	.001
		Occupation	.254	.086	.265	2.955	.004
		Weight	.026	.012	.204	2.291	.024
Health-care Use	1	(Constant)	9.576	.382		25.058	.000	5.339	.023^m	.050
		Diabetes Education	−.760	.329	−.224	−2.311	.023
	2	(Constant)	13.066	1.537		8.503	.000	5.529	.005ⁿ	.100
		Diabetes Education	−.808	.323	−.238	−2.504	.014
		Fear of Death	−.072	.031	−.223	−2.341	.021
	3	(Constant)	12.358	1.536		8.045	.000	5.599	.001^o	.145
		Diabetes Education	−.890	.318	−.262	−2.801	.006
		Fear of Death	−.077	.030	−.238	−2.554	.012
		Smoking	.581	.253	.215	2.295	.024

^aPredictors: (Constant), PVD.

^bPredictors: (Constant), PVD, Fear of Death.

^cPredictors: (Constant), PVD, Fear of Death, Nephropathy.

^dPredictors: (Constant), PVD, Fear of Deat,. Nephropathy, Ways of working.

^ePredictors: (Constant), Nephropathy.

^fPredictors: (Constant), Nephropathy, PVD.

^gPredictors: (Constant), Nephropathy, PVD, Diabetic foot.

^hPredictors: (Constant), Nephropathy, PVD, Diabetic foot, Ways of working.

^ıPredictors: (Constant), Escape acceptance.

ⁱPredictors: (Constant), Escape acceptance, Diabetic foot.

^jPredictors: (Constant), Escape acceptance, Diabetic foot, DAP-R.

^kPredictors: (Constant), Escape acceptance, Diabetic foot, DAP-R, Occupation, Weight.

^lPredictors: (Constant), Escape acceptance, Diabetic foot, DAP-R, Occupation.

^mPredictors: (Constant), Diabetes Education.

ⁿPredictors: (Constant), Diabetes Education, Fear of Death.

^oPredictors: (Constant), Diabetes Education, Fear of Death, Smoking.

*PVD: Peripheral vascular disease.

**DAP-R: Death Attitude Profile-Revised.

Discussion

People with diabetes feel the negative effects of the COVID-19 process at a high level. The risk of infection is high in this patient group, and they are in the category of patients with chronic diseases. People with diabetes have impaired phagocytosis, bactericidal activity, impaired neutrophil chemotaxis and impaired innate cell-mediated immunity (Ma & Holt, 2020). The COVID-19, which directly threatens the immune system and is associated primarily with the cause of death in chronic diseases, has become a higher rate of death in diabetic patients than cardiovascular diseases by causing severe pneumonia (Wu et al., 2020).

COVID-19 has a 4.6% mortality rate worldwide (World Health Organization, 2020). It has been determined that 10.5% of these deaths are due to Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD) (Wu et al., 2020). In contrast, diabetes was common comorbidity in SARS-CoV-1 and MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) patients prior to COVID-19. In SARS, the prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) was 11%, and the presence of diabetes was thought to increase the risk of death by twelvefold (Booth et al., 2003; Chan et al., 2003). DM and hypertension were found in 50% of MERS cases (Badawi & Ryoo, 2016). In addition, it has been determined that patients with hypertension and DM have a high risk of developing CVD caused by COVID-19 and the mortality rate in these patients is more than 50% (Yang et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020). In a previous study, it was found that 16% of severe COVID-19 cases and 5.7% of mild ones were patients with diabetes (Guan et al., 2020).

In our study, the rates of patients with CVD, neuropathy and nephropathy were 12.6%, 20.4% and 14.6%, respectively. Both the fear of death and the fear of COVID-19 were found to be high in patients with CVD (p < .01). In addition, diabetic patients with neuropathy and nephropathy were found to have a higher fear of COVID-19 than others (p < .01). When the types of fear felt by diabetic patients in the literature were examined, it was determined that amputation, hypoglycemic coma, blindness, and fear of disease progression were found to be the most common in patients aged 60 and over (Quandt et al., 2013). In the same study, it was found that the rate of those with fear of amputation was 33%, and those who feared blindness were 25% (Quandt et al., 2013). Another study found that patients with type 2 diabetes were afraid of having retinopathy, amputation, nephropathy, neuropathy, and stroke (Hendricks & Hendricks, 1998). In our study, the rate of patients with the diabetic foot was determined as 3.9%. In addition, the fear of death and COVID-19 in diabetic foot patients was found to be higher than the others (p < .01). In a previous study, it was stated that the greatest fear of patients with diabetic foot complications was death (Wukich et al., 2018).

The continuity of the problems caused by diabetes is due to the chronicity of the disease. Self-management plays a key role in the effective treatment of diabetes. Facilitating and preventing factors determine the effectiveness of self-management in DM (Kristianingrum et al., 2018). While family, social support and healthcare workers’ support are among the facilitating factors (Shen et al., 2013), the COVID-19 pandemic can be evaluated in the category of preventing factors. Indeed, in our study, it was found that civil servants and workers had higher diabetes self-management than other occupational groups, and it was determined that those who work 6–7 days a week outside the home have higher diabetes self-management than those who work from home or less outside. In addition, when looking at the Fear of COVID-19 scale scores of diabetic patients, it was found that those who constantly work from home have lower scores than others (p = .003), and it was also found that those wearing masks and using disinfectants and those who pay more attention to social distance have higher scores than the others (p < .01).

It is thought that there is an inverse relationship between good self-management and the duration of the disease in patients with diabetes. It is not always possible to cover the costs in terms of medicine, diet and hygiene products, which leads to the material and moral burnout of diabetic patients over the years. In a previous study, it was reported that the self-management of individuals diagnosed with DM for more than 5 years was impaired (Adwan & Najjar, 2013). Neuropathy, nephropathy and retinopathy, which are long-term complications of diabetes, have been associated with impaired self-management and poor compliance (Adwan & Najjar, 2013).

In our study, predictors of diabetes self-management obtained from regression analysis such as PVD, fear of death, nephropathy and ways of working were found to be statistically significant, and they were effective between 10% and 27% (p < .01). It was determined that our participants had an average diabetes history of 16.71 ± 9.40 years. Those adapting to the diet were 54.4%, those having diabetes education were 88.3%, and those giving regular blood for routine health check-ups were determined as 80.6%. It is stated in the literature that the support of healthcare professionals, family and relatives is very important in diabetes self-management (Chlebowy et al., 2010). In our study, it was found that a high score of 7.33 ± 0.51 (5.21–8.54) was obtained from Health-care Use, which is one of the subscales of DSMQ. The results obtained from our study are similar to the literature. Future studies can address the self-management of the elderly patient group, whose self-care potential is weakened and complications are severe.

Conclusion

In individuals with diabetes, the fear of COVID-19 increases the fear of death, and self-management is seen as an effective plan/method to reduce the risk of death. As a result of this study, the fear of death, which was already a risk and cause of unhappiness for patients with diabetes before the pandemic, became more severe during the pandemic, and the risk of COVID-19 transmission made life even more stressful.

Given the uncertainty of COVID-19 vaccines and available treatments, the main strategy to fight against the pandemic is social distancing, hand hygiene and wearing masks. The impact of the pandemic on social interactions, patients with chronic diseases, healthcare and the economy has been increasing. Staying at home is also not always possible for patients with chronic diseases, and people struggle with COVID-19 by working in crowded workspaces. It is very important to recognize the struggle of patients with chronic diseases, to provide social, economic and psychological support, and to integrate the findings of research like this into daily life.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Emine Kaplan Serin

Author Biographies

Emine Kaplan Serin is an assistant professor at Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Gaziantep University. The research fields of the author are intensive care, diabetes, cancer and COPD.

Semra Bülbüloğlu is an assistant professor at Department of Nursing, Erbaa Health Sciences Faculty, Gaziosmanpa?a University, in Tokat. The research fields of the author are intensive care and pre and post operative care.

References

Adwan

M. A.

Najjar

Y. W.

(2013). The relationship between demographic variables and diabetes self-management in diabetic patients in Amman city/Jordan. Global Journal of Health Science, 5(2), 213–220.

Ahorsu

D. K.

Lin

C. Y.

Imani

Saffari

Griffiths

M. D.

Pakpour

A. H.

(2020). The fear of COVID-19 scale: Development and initial validation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1–9. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8

Alvi

Assad

Aurang

Malik

M. A.

(2009). Anxiety and depression in burn patients. Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad, 21(1), 137–141.

Badawi

Ryoo

S. G.

(2016). Prevalence of comorbidities in the middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV): A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Infectious Diseases: Official Publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 49, 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2016.06.015

Booth

C. M.

Matukas

L. M.

Tomlinson

G. A.

Rachlis

A. R.

Rose

D. B.

Dwosh

H. A.

Walmsley

S. L.

Mazzulli

Avendano

Derkach

Ephtimios

I. E.

Kitai

Mederski

B. D.

Shadowitz

S. B.

Gold

W. L.

Hawryluck

L. A.

Rea

Chenkin

J. S.

Cescon

D. W.

Poutanen

S. M.

Detsky

A. S.

(2003). Clinical features and short-term outcomes of 144 patients with SARS in the greater Toronto area. JAMA, 289(21), 2801–2809. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.21.JOC30885

Chan

J. W.

C. K.

Chan

Y. H.

Mok

T. Y.

Lee

Chu

S. Y.

Law

W. L.

Lee

M. P.

P. C.

(2003). Short term outcome and risk factors for adverse clinical outcomes in adults with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Thorax, 58(8), 686–689. https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax.58.8.686

Chlebowy

Hood

LaJoie

(2010). Facilitators and barriers to self-management of type 2 diabetes among urban African American adults: Focus group findings. The Diabetes Educator, 36(6), 897–905.

Couch

R. B.

Englund

J. A.

Whimbey

(1997). Respiratory viral infections in immunocompetent and immunocompromised persons. The American Journal of Medicine, 102(3), 2–9.

Eroğlu

Sabuncu

(2018). Diyabet Öz yönetim skalası’nın (DÖYS) türk toplumuna uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Adaptation of diabetes self management questionnaire to Turkish society: Validity and reliability study. Nursing Sciences Journal, 1(3), 1–6.

10.

Gao

Zhang

Weng

Guo

Jia

Yang

Zou

Zhou

Pan

Gao

(2020). Patient characteristics and 6‐month dose of basal insulin associated with HbA1c achievement < 7.0% in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes: Results from the observational registry of basal insulin treatment (ORBIT). Journal of Diabetes, 12(9), 668–676.

11.

Glass

W. G.

Subbarao

Murphy

P. M.

(2004). Mechanisms of host defense following severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) pulmonary infection of mice. Journal of Immunology (Baltimore, Md.: 1950), 173(6), 4030–4039.

12.

Guan

W.-J.

Z.-Y.

Liang

W.-H.

C.-Q.

J.-X.

Liu

Shan

Lei

C.-L.

Hui

D. S. C.

L.-J.

Zeng

Yuen

K.-Y.

Chen

R.-C.

Tang

C.-L.

Wang

Chen

P.-Y.

Xiang

Zhong

N.-S.

(2020). Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. New England Journal of Medicine, 382(18), 1708–1720. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032

13.

Hendricks

L. E.

Hendricks

R. T.

(1998). Greatest fears of type 1 and type 2 patients about having diabetes: Implications for diabetes educators. The Diabetes Educator, 24(2), 168–173.

14.

Hosseinzadeh

Verma

Gopaldasani

(2020). Patient activation and type 2 diabetes mellitus self-management: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 26(6), 431.

15.

Huang

Wang

Ren

Zhao

Zhang

Fan

Cheng

Xia

Wei

Xie

Yin

Liu

Cao

(2020). Clinical features of patients infected with2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan. Lancet (London, England), 395(10223), 497–506.

16.

Işık Abalı

(2008). Ölüme karşı tutum ölçeği” nin türk toplumu için geçerlik ve güvenirliği. [Testing the reliability and validıty of the “death attitudes profile–revised” in Turkish population] [yüksek lisans tezi]. Ege Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İç Hastalıkları Hemşireliği Anabilim Dalı.

17.

Kapısız

Ö.

Eker

(2018). Evaluation of the relationship between the levels and perceptions of dyspnea and the levels of anxiety and depression in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 9(2), 88–95.

18.

Kristianingrum

N. D.

Wiarsih

Nursasi

A. Y.

(2018). Perceived family support among older persons in diabetes mellitus self-management. BMC Geriatrics, 18(S1), 1–5.

19.

R. C. W.

Holt

R. I. G.

(2020). COVID‐19 and diabetes. Diabetic Medicine: A Journal of the British Diabetic Association, 37(5), 723–725.

20.

Pamungkas

R. A.

Chamroonsawasdi

(2020). Self-management based coaching program to improve diabetes mellitus self-management practice and metabolic markers among uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus in Indonesia: A quasi-experimental study. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, 14(1), 53–61.

21.

Pleasure

S. J.

Green

A. J.

Josephson

S. A.

(2020). The spectrum of neurologic disease in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic infection: Neurologists move to the frontlines. JAMA Neurology, 77(6), 679–680.

22.

Quandt

S. A.

Reynolds

Chapman

Bell

R. A.

Grzywacz

J. G.

E. H.

Kirk

J. K.

Arcury

T. A.

(2013). Older adults’ fears about diabetes: Using common sense models of disease to understand fear origins and implications for self-management. Journal of Applied Gerontology: The Official Journal of the Southern Gerontological Society, 32(7), 783–718.

23.

Ralph

Viljoen

(2018). Current opinion about surgery-related fear and anxiety. Journal of Perioperative Nursing, 31(3), 3–5.

24.

Satici

Gocet-Tekin

Deniz

M. E.

Satici

S. A.

(2020). Adaptation of the fear of COVID-19 scale: Its association with psychological distress and life satisfaction in Turkey. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1–9.Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00294-0

25.

Schmitt

Gahr

Hermanns

Kulzer

Huber

Haak

(2013). The diabetes self-management questionnaire (DSMQ): Development and evaluation of an instrument to assess diabetes self-care activities associated with glycaemic control. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 11, 138.

26.

Shen

Edwards

Courtney

McDowell

Wei

(2013). Barriers and facilitators to diabetes self-management: Perspectives of older community dwellers and health professionals in China. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 19(6), 627–635.

27.

Tanaka

Shibayama

Sugimoto

Hidaka

(2020). Diabetes self-management education and support for adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 169, 108480.

28.

Wong

P. T. P.

(1994). Death attitude profile revised: A multidimensional measure of attitudes toward death. In Neimeyer

R. A.

(Ed.), Death anxiety handbook: Research, instrumentation, and application (pp. 121–148). Taylor & Francis.

29.

World Health Organization. (2020). WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) dashboard.

30.

Lau

E. S. H.

R. C. W.

Kong

A. P. S.

Wild

S. H.

Goggins

Chow

W.-Y.

Chan

J. C. N.

Luk

A. O. Y.

(2020). Secular trends in all‐cause and cause‐specific mortality rates in people with diabetes in Hong Kong, 2001–2016: A retrospective cohort study. Diabetologia, 63(4), 757–766.

31.

Wukich

D. K.

Raspovic

K. M.

Suder

N. C.

(2018). Patients with diabetic foot disease fear major lower-extremity amputation more than death. Foot & Ankle Specialist, 11(1), 17–21.

32.

Yang

Zheng

Gou

Chen

Guo

(2020). Prevalence of comorbidities in the novel Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.017

33.

Zhang

Xie

Hashimoto

(2020). Current status of potential therapeutic candidates for the COVID-19 crisis. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 87, 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.046

34.

Zheng

Y. Y.

Y. T.

Zhang

J. Y.

Xie

(2020). COVID-19 and the cardiovascular system. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 17(5), 259–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-020-0360-5

35.

Zhou

Fan

Liu

Xiang

Wang

Song

Guan

Wei

Zhang

Chen

Cao

(2020). Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: A retrospective cohort study. The Lancet, 395(10229), 1054–1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3

The Effect of Attitude to Death on Self-Management in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

Keywords

Material and Method

Research Design and Participants

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Data Collection Tools

Death Attitude Profile-Revised

Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire

Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S)

Statistical Analysis

Ethics

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Author Biographies

References