Marit Graue

Patient and public involvement in diabetes research is now actively encouraged in different countries because it is believed that involving people with experience of the condition will improve the quality and relevance of the research. However, reviews of patient involvement have noted that inadequate resources, patients’ and communities’ lack of research knowledge, and researchers’ lack of skills to involve patients and communities in research may present significant contextual barriers. Little is known about the extent of patient/community involvement in designing or delivering interventions for people with diabetes. A realist review of involvement will contribute to assessing when, how and why involvement works, or does not work, to produce better diabetes interventions. This protocol outlines the process for conducting a realist review to map how patients and the public have been involved in diabetes research to date. The review questions ask the following: How have people with diabetes and the wider community been involved in diabetes research? What are the characteristics of the process that appear to explain the relative success or failure of involvement? How has involvement (or lack of involvement) in diabetes research influenced the development and conduct of diabetes research? The degree of support in the surrounding context will be assessed alongside the ways in which people interact in different settings to identify patterns of interaction between context, mechanisms and outcomes in different research projects. The level and extent of the involvement will be described for each stage of the research project. The descriptions will be critically reviewed by the people with diabetes on our review team. In addition, researchers and patients in diabetes research will be asked to comment. Information from researcher-patient experiences and documents will be compared to theories of involvement across a range of disciplines to create a mid-range theory describing how involvement (or lack of involvement) in diabetes research influences the development and conduct of diabetes research.

Building capacity in a changing health care system is a challenge for advanced nursing education programs. Master-level nursing education is increasingly becoming the required education level for specialist nurses, and additional studies are needed to learn more about students’ experiences and learning transitions while undertaking such education. This study aimed to explore nursing students’ experience of their learning transitions while undertaking advanced nursing education and to describe how they translated the new knowledge and competence they gained into clinical practice. We used a qualitative research design with narrative self-reported reflections. 34 nurses (95 % women) from both urban and rural areas working with children, with adults in outpatient and inpatient endocrinology clinics in hospitals or with adults, including older people, attending primary health care services participated in the study. We collected data at two time points 15 months apart. Time one was the first week of the advanced nursing education, and time two was the completion of the education program. We used Malterud’s modification of Giorgi’s phenomenological analysis, otherwise known as systematic text condensation, to analyze the data. Two core themes captured the participants’ experiences. The first theme was “assessing the situation of people with diabetes from a different perspective”, with the subthemes “an expanded perspective of practice and higher level of reflection”, “applying critical thinking in practice” and “changing patient-nurse relationships in diabetes care”. The second core theme was “a change in participants’ perception of their professional position”, with the subthemes “a greater knowledge base enhancing professional confidence” and “a more equal position within the professional team”. The study provides in-depth information about transition into advanced nursing education and can inform curriculum developers, nurse educators, policy-makers and nursing managers about how nursing education broadened participants’ perspectives of nursing and enhanced their confidence and professional position.

Objective. To explore the experiences and clinical challenges that nurses and nursing assistants face when providing high-quality diabetes-specific management and care for elderly people with diabetes in primary care settings. Design. Focus-group interviews. Subjects and setting. Sixteen health care professionals: 12 registered nurses and four nursing assistants from nursing homes (10), district nursing service (5), and a service unit (1) were recruited by municipal managers who had local knowledge and knew the workforce. All the participants were women aged 32–59 years with clinical experience ranging from 1.5 to 38 years. Results. Content analysis revealed a discrepancy between the level of expertise which the participants described as important to delivering high-quality care and their capacity to deliver such care. The discrepancy was due to lack of availability and access to current information, limited ongoing support, lack of cohesion among health care professionals, and limited confidence and autonomy. Challenges to delivering high-quality care included complex, difficult patient situations and lack of confidence to make decisions founded on evidence-based guidelines. Conclusion. Participants lacked confidence and autonomy to manage elderly people with diabetes in municipal care settings. Lack of information, support, and professional cohesion made the role challenging.

Background: Hypoglycemia is common in type 1 diabetes, but the overall frequency of both mild and severe hypoglycemia is difficult to estimate. The Hypoglycemia Fear Survey II (HFS-II) is often used to assess the fear of hypoglycemia. Material and methods: The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the HFS-II for adults, including the behavior (HFS-B) and worry (HFS-W) subscales, among 235 adults in Norway with type 1 diabetes. We assessed associations between HFS-II scores and other rating scales and demographic and clinical variables. Results: The Norwegian version of HFS-II had an acceptable factor structure in relation to HFS-W, whereas the structure within HFS-B was more questionable. The expected relationships between HFS-II subscales and measures of related constructs administered concurrently demonstrated adequate convergent and discriminant validity. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were satisfactory. Conclusion: Access to reliable and valid self-report instruments enables the early detection of psychosocial problems. HFS-W performs well, whereas HFS-B needs to be further examined and developed.

International guidelines on type 1 diabetes advocate routine screening of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). DISABKIDS questionnaires are the first instruments developed across cultures and nations to provide age-appropriate measures of HRQOL in children with chronic diseases. DISABKIDS includes a Chronic Generic Module 37 (DCGM-37) and disease-specific modules. The purpose of this study was to examine reliability and validity of the Norwegian versions of the DISABKIDS questionnaires in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.