Cited by 68Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchSchizophrenia research and treatment

Barriers to effective diabetes management–a survey of people with severe mental illness

Open access
Mulligan, Kathleen, McBain, Hayley, Lamontagne-Godwin, Frederique, Chapman, Jacqui, Flood, Chris, Haddad, Mark, Jones, Julia, Simpson, Alan·2018·BMC Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: People with severe mental illnesses (SMI) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes and have poorer health outcomes than those with diabetes alone. To maintain good diabetes control, people with diabetes are advised to engage in several self-management behaviours. The aim of this study was to identify barriers or enablers of diabetes self-management experienced by people with SMI. METHODS: Adults with type 2 diabetes and SMI were recruited through UK National Health Service organisations and mental health and diabetes charities. Participants completed an anonymous survey consisting of: Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA); CORE-10 measure of psychological distress; a measure of barriers and enablers of diabetes self-management based on the Theoretical Domains Framework; Diabetes UK care survey on receipt of 14 essential aspects of diabetes healthcare. To identify the strongest explanatory variables of SDSCA outcomes, significant variables (p < .05) identified from univariate analyses were entered into multiple regressions. RESULTS: Most of the 77 participants had bipolar disorder (42%) or schizophrenia (36%). They received a mean of 7.6 (SD 3.0) diabetes healthcare essentials. Only 28.6% had developed a diabetes care plan with their health professional and only 40% reported receiving specialist psychological support. Engagement in self-management activities was variable. Participants reported taking medication on 6.1 (SD 2.0) days in the previous week but other behaviours were less frequent: general diet 4.1 (2.3) days; specific diet 3.6 (1.8) days, taking exercise 2.4 (2.1) days and checking feet on 1.7 (1.8) days. Smoking prevalence was 44%. Participants reported finding regular exercise and following a healthy diet particularly difficult. Factors associated with diabetes self-management included: the level of diabetes healthcare and support received; emotional wellbeing; priority given to diabetes; perceived ability to manage diabetes or establish a routine to do so; and perceived consequences of diabetes self-management. CONCLUSIONS: Several aspects of diabetes healthcare and self-management are suboptimal in people with SMI. There is a need to improve diabetes self-management support for this population by integrating diabetes action plans into care planning and providing adequate psychological support to help people with SMI manage their diabetes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12888-018-1744-5

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 43 · Cited by 68

Authors
Mulligan, K., McBain, H., Lamontagne-Godwin, F., Chapman, J., Flood, C., Haddad, M., Jones, J., & Simpson, A.
Affiliations
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Hertfordshire (GB)
Corresponding author
Mulligan, Kathleen
Venue
BMC Psychiatry
Published
2018-06-01
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
165-165
ISSN
1471-244X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2804512240
Cited by
68
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2
FWCI
7.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • UWL Repository (University of West London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Open (London South Bank University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Hertfordshire Research Archive (University of Hertfordshire) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Barts Charity (477/2314)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, severe mental illness, diabetes self-management, barriers and facilitators, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psychological support, dietary adherence, physical activity, smoking, emotional well-being, Theoretical Domains Framework
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Adult, Mental Disorders, Delivery of Health Care, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Research Design, Severity of Illness Index, Disease Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review