Evidence Hub

The effect of a primary care intervention on diabetes distress in individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Anders Larrabee Sonderlund, T. Thilsing, Gitte Stentebjerg Petersen, Troels Mygind Jensen, S. Wehberg, Jan Erik Henriksen, Jens Søndergaard, S. F. Buhl

BMC Primary Care, 2026

193 participants

Abstract

Background Little is known about how best to intervene against diabetes distress in patients recently diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We evaluate the effect of a structured, inter-sectoral primary care intervention on diabetes distress in individuals during the 12 months following diagnosis. Method In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, 30 general practice clinics in the Region of Southern Denmark were randomized 1:1 to an intervention or routine diabetes care. The intervention was designed to improve continuity of care, quality of care, and patient diabetes literacy. Patients completed the 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS-17) shortly after diagnosis and again 12 months later. The primary outcome was between-group changes in DDS scores over time. Secondary outcomes included between-group changes in HbA1c and HDL cholesterol levels between diagnosis and follow-up. Results A total of 193 patients completed the baseline questionnaire (58 control; 136 intervention), 87 also completed 12-month follow-up (23 control, 64 intervention). The initial DDS indicated that 28.4% of the entire sample experienced distress. This increased to 32.1% at follow-up. No significant group differences were found in changes of overall DDS scores (β = − 0.25, 95% CI = − 0.49, 0.00). A statistically significant effect was observed on interpersonal diabetes distress, with a group x time interaction (β = − 0.30, 95% CI = − 0.54, − 0.06). Reductions in the number of patients with abnormal…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 193 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free