Association of Higher Rates of Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) Complications with Psychological and Demographic Variables: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study

Figures & data

Table 1 Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Psychological Characteristics of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Study Sample (N = 2574)

Sociodemographic Characteristics	Statistics	Value
Age	Mean (SD)	63.58 (9.58)
	Median	64
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	58, 70
	Min-Max	<22; 94>
	Category	Frequency (%)
Education	Primary	884 (34.3%)
	Secondary	1333 (51.8%)
	Higher	340 (13.2%)
Residence	Rural	651 (25.3%)
	Town	998 (38.8%)
	City	902 (35%)
Clinical characteristics	Statistics	Value
Duration of diabetes (years)	Mean (SD)	10.24 (6.10)
	Median	10
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	6, 13
	Min-Max	<0.3; 74>
BMI (kg/m^2)	Mean (SD)	29.69 (4.41)
	Median	29.23
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	26.89, 32.01
	Min-Max	<16.18; 56.19>
	Category	Frequency (%)
	Underweight	5 (0.2%)
	Normal (healthy weight)	285 (11.1%)
	Overweight	1160 (45.1%)
	Obese Class I (Moderately obese)	794 (30.8%)
	Obese Class II (Severely obese)	223 (8.7%)
	Obese Class III (Very severely obese)	54 (2.1%)
HbA1c	Statistics	Value
	Mean (SD)	7.99 (1.11)
	Median	7.90
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	7.30, 8.50
	Min-Max	<4.10; 15.00>
	Category	Frequency (%)
	≤7	419
	>7	2155
Diabetes complications	Statistics	Value
	Mean (SD)	1.16 (1.06)
	Median	1.00
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	0, 2
	Min-Max	<0; 4>
	Category	Frequency (%)
	Macroangiopathy	1150 (44.7%)
	Retinopathy	859 (33.4%)
	Nephropathy	270 (10.5%)
	Neuropathy	717 (27.9%)
Psychological characteristics	Category	Frequency (%)
Coping style	Mixed/undifferentiated	1337 (54.4%)
	Avoidance-oriented	300 (12.2%)
	Task-oriented	367 (14.9%)
	Best solution–oriented	248 (10.1%)
	Emotions-oriented	206 (8.4%)
WHO-5 Well-Being Index	Statistics	Value
	Mean (SD)	15.36 (4.65)
	Median	15.00
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	12.25, 18.75
	Min-Max	<0; 25>
	Category	Frequency (%)
	No risk of depression (>13)	1775 (69%)
	Requiring clinical verification (8–13)	582 (22.6%)
	High risk of depression (≤7 score or at least one of the questions rated 0–1 point)	166 (6.4%)
Sens of influence on the diabetes course	Statistics	Value
	Mean (SD)	2.56 (0.96)
	Median	3.0
	Quartiles (Q1, Q3)	2.0, 3.0
	Min-Max	<0; 4>

Note: The percentages do not sum up to 100, since the respondents could choose more than one answer or none.

Table 2 A Summary of the Three-Step Hierarchical Regression Analysis for the Number of Diabetes Complications Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Study Sample (N = 2574)

Sociodemographic Variables	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	B (SE)	β	t	B (SE)	β	t	B (SE)	β	t	VIF
Sex^a	−0.17 (0.04)	−0.08	−3.93***	−0.19 (0.04)	−0.09	−4.57***	−0.20 (0.04)	−0.09	−4.88***	1.06
Age	0.03(0.002)	0.27	13.30***	0.02 (0.002)	0.17	8.24***	0.02 (0.002)	0.15	7.26***	1.25
Residence^b
Town	−0.02 (0.06)	−0.01	−0.36	−0.06 (0.05)	−0.03	−1.12	−0.06 (0.05)	−0.03	−1.14	1.74
City	0.05 (0.06)	0.02	0.85	−0.02 (0.06)	−0.01	−0.30	−0.01 (0.06)	0.00	−0.19	1.84
Education^c
Secondary	0.38 (0.51)	−0.08	−3.19***	−0.13 (0.05)	−0.06	−2.71**	−0.09 (0.05)	−0.04	−1.93^	1.51
Higher	0.20 (0.07)	−0.13	−5.29***	−0.29 (0.07)	−0.09	−4.16***	−0.19 (0.07)	−0.06	−2.73**	1.55
Clinical variables
Duration of diabetes				0.06 (0.003)	0.33	16.47***	0.06 (0.003)	0.33	16.61***	1.15
HbA1c (%)				0.28 (0.06)	0.10	5.10***	0.25 (0.05)	0.09	4.63***	1.02
BMI (kg/m^2)				0.02 (0.005)	0.08	4.10***	0.02 (0.01)	0.07	3.80***	1.04
Psychological variables
WHO-5 Index results							−0.02 (0.01)	−0.10	−4.88***	1.24
Sense of influence on the diabetes course							−0.05 (0.03)	−0.05	−2.08*	1.50
Coping style^d
Mixed/undifferentiated							−0.16 (0.8)	−0.07	−2.12*	3.65
Avoidance-oriented							−0.04 (0.09)	−0.01	−0.46	2.16
Task-oriented							−0.16 (0.09)	−0.05	−1.82^	2.68
Best solution–oriented							−0.19 (0.10)	−0.05	−1.97*	2.27
Model summary	R^2 = 0.103, R^2adj = 0.101 F(6, 2298) = 44.18***			R^2 = 0.212, R^2adj = 0.209, ΔR^2 = 0.109 F(9, 2295) = 68.61*** ΔF(3, 2295) = 105.42***			R^2 = 0.233, R^2adj = 0.228, ΔR^2 =0.021 F(15, 2289) = 46.41*** ΔF(6, 2289) = 10.54***

Notes: Factors were represented as dummy variables: ^aMales as the reference group, ^bRural areas as the reference, ^cPrimary education level as the reference, ^dEmotions-oriented style as the reference. A dummy variable is compared with the reference group. The positive regression coefficient means that income is higher for the dummy variable than for the reference group; a negative regression coefficient means that income is lower. ^p = [0.05–0.10]; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Table 3 Logistic Regression of Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Psychological Variables and the Occurrence of Complications of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Study Population (N = 2574)

Sociodemographic Variables	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
	B(SE)	OR	B(SE)	OR	B(SE)	OR
Constant	−2.76 (0.37)***	0.064	−4.72 (0.56)***	0.009	−3.44 (0.64)***	0.032
Sex^a	−0.29 (0.10)**	0.746	−0.37 (0.10)***	0.688	−0.39 (0.11)***	0.677
Age	0.07 (0.01)***	1.069	0.05 (0.01)***	1.048	0.04 (0.01)***	1.045
Residence^b
Town	−0.32 (0.13)*	0.729	−0.41 (0.14)**	0.666	−0.42 (0.14)**	0.655
City	−0.28 (0.14)	0.759	−0.42 (0.15)**	0.654	−0.42 (0.15)**	0.657
Education^c
Secondary	−0.16 (0.12)	0.852	−0.09 (0.13)	0.915	−0.01 (0.13)	0.993
Higher	−0.78 (0.16)***	0.456	−0.61 (0.17)***	0.541	−0.47 (0.18)**	0.624
Clinical variables
HbA1c^d			0.57 (0.14)***	1.763	0.52 (0.14)***	1.683
Duration of diabetes			0.15 (0.01)***	1.161	0.15 (0.01)***	1.162
BMI (kg/m^2)			0.05 (0.01)***	1.050	0.05 (0.01)***	1.048
Psychological variables
Sense of influence on the diabetes course					−0.17 (07)**	0.843
WHO-5 Index results^e
Risk of depression					0.05 (0.13)	1.055
High risk of depression					0.62 (0.28)*	1.858
Coping style^f
Mixed/undifferentiated					−0.73 (0.23)**	0.482
Avoidance-oriented					−0.67 (0.27)*	0.513
Task-oriented					−0.86 (0.26)***	0.424
Best solution–oriented					−0.43 (0.28)	0.651
−2LL	2543.20		2319.91		2281.13
Nagelkerke pseudo R^2	0.141		0.261		0.280
χ2	χ^2(6) = 235.90, p < 0.001		χ^2(9) = 459.19, p < 0.001		χ^2(16) = 497.97, p < 0.001
Hosmer–Lemeshow test	χ^2(8) = 6.00, p = 0.647		χ^2(8) = 15.63, p = 0.048		χ^2(8) = 7.76, p = 0.458
Classification accuracy	72.4%		75.3%		75.8%

Notes: Factors were represented as dummy variables: ^aMales as the reference group, ^bRural area as the reference, ^cPrimary education level as the reference, ^dHbA_1c ≤7% as the reference, ^eNo risk of depression as the reference, ^fEmotions-oriented style as the reference. A dummy variable is compared with the reference group. The positive regression coefficient means that income is higher for the dummy variable than for the reference group; a negative regression coefficient means that income is lower. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.