» Articles » PMID: 25361382

Quantifying Direct Effects of Social Determinants of Health on Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Overview
Date 2014 Nov 1
PMID 25361382
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate if self-care is the pathway through which social determinants of health impact diabetes outcomes by analyzing the direct and indirect effects of socioeconomic and psychosocial factors on self-care and glycemic control.

Subjects And Methods: Six hundred fifteen adults were recruited from two primary care clinics in the southeastern United States. A series of confirmatory factor analyses identified the latent factors underlying social status, psychosocial determinants (psychological distress, self-efficacy, and social support), and self-care (diet, exercise, foot care, glucose testing, and medication adherence). Structured equation modeling investigated the relationship among social determinants, self-care and glycemic control.

Results: Latent variables were created for diabetes self-care, psychological distress, self-efficacy, social support, and social status. The final model [χ(2)(275)=450.07, P<0.001, R(2)=99, root mean square error of approximation=0.03, comparative fit index=0.98] showed lower psychological distress (r=-0.13, P=0.012), higher social support (r=0.14, P=0.01), and higher self-efficacy (r=0.47, P<0.001) were significantly related to diabetes self-care. Lower psychological distress (r=0.10, P=0.03), lower social support (r=0.10, P=0.02), and higher self-efficacy (r=-0.37, P<0.001) were significantly related to lower glycemic control. When social determinants of health variables were included in the model, self-care was no longer significantly associated with glycemic control (r=0.01, P=0.83).

Conclusions: This study suggests a direct relationship between psychosocial determinants of health and glycemic control. Although associated with self-care, the relationship between social determinants of health and glycemic control is not mediated by self-care. Development of interventions should take psychosocial factors into account as independent influences on diabetes outcomes, rather than as indirect influences via self-care behavior.

Citing Articles

Characteristics and Dosing Patterns of Tirzepatide Users with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States.

Mody R, Desai K, Teng C, Reznor G, Stockbower G, Grabner M Diabetes Ther. 2025; 16(2):307-327.

PMID: 39794609 PMC: 11794899. DOI: 10.1007/s13300-024-01684-6.


Implications for Self-Management among African Caribbean Adults with Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health Disorders: A Systematic Review.

Magny-Normilus C, Hassan S, Sanders J, Longhurst C, Lee C, Jurgens C Biomedicines. 2022; 10(11).

PMID: 36359258 PMC: 9687849. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10112735.


Influence of Literacy, Self-Efficacy, and Social Support on Diabetes-Related Outcomes Following Hospital Discharge.

White A, Buschur E, Harris C, Pennell M, Soliman A, Wyne K Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2022; 15:2323-2334.

PMID: 35958875 PMC: 9359168. DOI: 10.2147/DMSO.S327158.


Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Depression: Evidence for Genotype × Environment Interaction in Mexican Americans.

Manusov E, Diego V, Sheikh K, Laston S, Blangero J, Williams-Blangero S Front Psychiatry. 2022; 13:936052.

PMID: 35845438 PMC: 9283683. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.936052.


Complications in Diabetes Mellitus: Social Determinants and Trends.

Cuddapah G, Chennakesavulu P, Pentapurthy P, Vallakati M, Kongara A, Reddivari P Cureus. 2022; 14(4):e24415.

PMID: 35619856 PMC: 9126423. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.24415.


References
1.
Cosansu G, Erdogan S . Influence of psychosocial factors on self-care behaviors and glycemic control in Turkish patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Transcult Nurs. 2013; 25(1):51-9. DOI: 10.1177/1043659613504112. View

2.
Toobert D, Hampson S, Glasgow R . The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000; 23(7):943-50. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.23.7.943. View

3.
Byrne B . Factor analytic models: viewing the structure of an assessment instrument from three perspectives. J Pers Assess. 2005; 85(1):17-32. DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8501_02. View

4.
Cundiff J, Smith T, Uchino B, Berg C . Subjective social status: construct validity and associations with psychosocial vulnerability and self-rated health. Int J Behav Med. 2011; 20(1):148-58. DOI: 10.1007/s12529-011-9206-1. View

5.
Sherbourne C, Stewart A . The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991; 32(6):705-14. DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90150-b. View