4.7 Article

Development and validation of a distress measurement for insulin injections among patients with diabetes

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38982-1

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to develop and validate the Distress of Self-Injection (DSI) scale for patients with diabetes aged ≥10 years. The DSI scale with 20 questions in three domains (physical, psychosocial, and process) was found to have good structural validity and strong correlation with the Korean version of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-K) scale.
Insulin injections are stressful but necessary for people with diabetes. This study aimed to develop and validate the Distress of Self-Injection (DSI) scale for patients with diabetes aged & GE; 10 years. We created a questionnaire to evaluate DSI after examining each item following a literature review. The DSI scale with 20 questions in three domains (physical [4], psychosocial [7], and process [9]) was developed and tested at the Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, Korea, from April to September 2021. To verify structural validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were conducted. Internal consistency was also calculated. To assess construct and criterion validity, the correlation between the DSI scale and Korean version of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-K) scale was obtained. Cronbach's alpha varied from 0.69 to 0.87, and the DSI score was 0.90, demonstrating acceptable internal consistency. CFA fit indices (CFI = 0.980; RMSEA = 0.033) were favorable. DSI and pertinent PAID-K domains correlated strongly. For measuring self-injection distress, the DSI score had good accuracy. For patients with diabetes aged & GE; 10 years who self-inject insulin, the DSI was a viable and accurate method for quantifying discomfort associated with insulin injection. Health practitioners should use the DSI to communicate with patients about their suffering.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available