Haupt E, Herrmann R, Benecke-Timp A, Vogel H, Haupt A, Walter C
Saale-Klinik der BfA, Bad Kissingen, Germany.
Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 1996;104(5):378-86. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1211471.
The Kissingen Diabetes Intervention Study (KID) evaluated 1050 diabetic patients of the German Federal Insurance for Salaried Employees' Institution (BfA) admitted for inpatient rehabilitation. A single-center prospective, longitudinal study collected data concerning baseline characteristics of patient cohort, socioeconomic factors and mode of intervention at the time of admission, discharge and outcome 6 and 12 months after discharge with consecutively obtained random tests. This cohort of patients is especially interesting for aspects of health policy because it is composed of rather young diabetics engaged in professional work. The data suggest that on the one hand considerably fewer type I diabetics than type II diabetics are married, but that on the other hand constant relationships are equally common in both groups when not considering the marital status. 70% of all diabetics have regular working hours, only 10% of the type II diabetics and negligible 3.9% of the type 1 diabetics work nightshifts. Nevertheless, 29.4% of the type I diabetics and 36.4% of the type II diabetics were unfit for work for at least 4 weeks in the 6 months prior to admission. Only 35.5% of all diabetics see their doctor once or twice monthly. The disease was first diagnosed by the general practitioner in 70% of all cases. Thorough information concerning the disease was provided only in 33.7% of type II diabetics and 26.1% of type I diabetics. 50.6% of type I diabetics and 68.4% of type II diabetics did not receive any education during the all important first year after diagnosis. Most of the diabetic education which had taken place was provided by general hospitals but also by specialized diabetes hospitals and rehabilitation hospitals. 65.6% of all type II diabetics do not monitor urine glucose and those who do so, monitor only once to twice weekly or less. Fortunately 96.3% of all type I diabetics monitor blood glucose, but only 41.0% of them monitor as frequently as is appropriate. 28.3% receive material for monitoring glucose levels only after asking for this. In 32% of the type II diabetics monitoring urine glucose, the general practitioner does not discuss the results with them. Regular controls of glycolysated hemoglobin is part of the diabetic management in 84.4% of all type I diabetics, but carried out in only 34.9% of all type II diabetics, among which the checking of fasting glucose dominates laboratory controls with 50.9%. However, blood lipids are monitored in half of the patients. Huge deficits have been found in the monitoring of urinary albumin excretion in type I diabetics, but especially in type II diabetics. Fear of the future and depression are the predominant strains in everyday life for type I diabetics as well as for type II diabetics. Next most important is the fear of hypoglycemias for type I diabetics, who also feel significantly more restricted in leisure time activities than type II diabetics do. No difference was found between the two groups concerning the demands of treatment. Differences were marked in that more type I than type II diabetics complain of strain in professional life due to their disease, and that a higher proportion of type II diabetics feel impaired by physical complaints (higher incidence of multimorbidity) and consider their relationships more strained by the diabetes than type I diabetics. Surprisingly, problems with accepting the disease and problems in the doctor-patient relationship were of similarly low importance in both groups. We will soon report the changes of the parameters discussed here found after inpatient rehabilitation with intensive diabetic education, promotion of physical activities and psychological measures.
基辛根糖尿病干预研究(KID)对德国联邦受薪雇员保险机构(BfA)收治的1050例糖尿病患者进行了住院康复评估。一项单中心前瞻性纵向研究收集了患者队列的基线特征、社会经济因素以及入院时、出院时和出院后6个月及12个月随访时的干预方式等数据,并进行了连续随机检测。这组患者对于卫生政策方面尤其具有研究价值,因为他们主要是从事专业工作的年轻糖尿病患者。数据表明,一方面,I型糖尿病患者的已婚人数比II型糖尿病患者少得多,但另一方面,不考虑婚姻状况的话,稳定关系在两组中同样普遍。所有糖尿病患者中有70%工作时间规律,II型糖尿病患者中只有10%上夜班,I型糖尿病患者中只有微不足道的3.9%上夜班。然而,在入院前6个月中,29.4%的I型糖尿病患者和36.4%的II型糖尿病患者至少有4周无法工作。所有糖尿病患者中只有35.5%每月看医生一到两次。在所有病例中,70%的患者疾病最初是由全科医生诊断的。只有33.7%的II型糖尿病患者和26.1%的I型糖尿病患者得到了关于疾病的全面信息。50.6%的I型糖尿病患者和68.4%的II型糖尿病患者在确诊后的关键第一年没有接受任何教育。大多数糖尿病教育是由综合医院提供的,但专科医院和康复医院也提供了部分教育。所有II型糖尿病患者中有65.6%不监测尿糖,而那些监测尿糖的患者,也只是每周监测一到两次或更少。幸运的是,所有I型糖尿病患者中有96.3%监测血糖,但其中只有41.0%的患者监测频率合适。28.3% 的患者只是在询问后才收到血糖监测材料。在监测尿糖的II型糖尿病患者中,32%的患者全科医生不与他们讨论监测结果。在所有I型糖尿病患者中,84.4%的患者糖化血红蛋白的定期检测是糖尿病管理的一部分,但在所有II型糖尿病患者中,只有34.9%的患者进行此项检测,其中空腹血糖检测在实验室检测中占主导地位,比例为50.9%。然而,一半的患者会监测血脂。I型糖尿病患者在尿白蛋白排泄监测方面存在巨大不足,II型糖尿病患者尤其如此。对未来的恐惧和抑郁是I型糖尿病患者和II型糖尿病患者日常生活中的主要压力。其次,对I型糖尿病患者来说,最主要的是对低血糖的恐惧,而且他们在休闲活动中也明显比II型糖尿病患者更受限制。两组在治疗需求方面没有差异。差异显著的是,抱怨因疾病而在职业生涯中感到压力的I型糖尿病患者比II型糖尿病患者更多,而且认为身体不适(合并症发病率更高)对其造成影响以及认为糖尿病对其人际关系影响更大的II型糖尿病患者比例高于I型糖尿病患者。令人惊讶的是,在接受疾病方面的问题以及医患关系方面的问题在两组中的重要性同样较低。我们很快将报告在进行强化糖尿病教育、促进体育活动和采取心理措施的住院康复后,这里所讨论参数的变化情况。