Interventions involving own treatment choice for people living with coexisting severe mental illness and type 1 or 2 diabetes: A scoping review

Aim The objective of this scoping review was to summarize, understand and provide an overview of the empirical literature on interventions involving own treatment choice for people with coexisting diabetes (type 1 and 2) and severe mental illness (SMI). Methods This scoping review undertook a system...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Diabetic medicine 2021-09, Vol.38 (9), p.e14626-n/a
Main Authors: Zabell, Vicki, Rønne, Sabrina T., Høgsgaard, Ditte, Jørgensen, Rikke, Gæde, Peter H., Arnfred, Sidse M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Clinical decision making
combined care
Comorbidity
co‐morbid illness
Delivery of Health Care - methods
Diabetes
Diabetes mellitus (insulin dependent)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - epidemiology
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 - epidemiology
Empowerment
Global Health
Health Education
Humans
Incidence
Mental disorders
Mental Disorders - epidemiology
Preferences
psychiatric disorders
type 1 diabetes
type 2 diabetes
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim The objective of this scoping review was to summarize, understand and provide an overview of the empirical literature on interventions involving own treatment choice for people with coexisting diabetes (type 1 and 2) and severe mental illness (SMI). Methods This scoping review undertook a systematic literature assessment. Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and grey literature (OpenGrey, Google Scholar and Danish Health and Medicine Authority databases). Publications from 2000 to July 2020 were of interest. Studies were included if they involved the users’ own choice of treatment. Included studies: RCT, intervention, cohort and case‐based studies. Results A total of 4320 articles were screened, of which nine were included. The review identified eight studies from the United States and one from Canada testing different interventions for people with SMI and diabetes (one diabetes education program, five randomized controlled trials, one retrospective cohort study, one naturalistic intervention program and one case vignette). The interventions described in the nine articles involved service users, the majority incorporated individualized healthcare plans, and all interventions were based on multidisciplinary teamwork. Conclusions Research in the area is limited. Care management interventions tend to focus on a single condition, paradoxically excluding SMI during enrolment. Interventions aimed at people with both conditions often prioritize one condition treatment leading to an unbalanced care.
ISSN:0742-3071
1464-5491
DOI:10.1111/dme.14626