ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Int. J. Public Health, 23 January 2024

Volume 69 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1606790

Public Expectations and Needs Related to Type 2 Diabetes Prevention: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study in Poland

  • School of Public Health, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland

Article metrics

2

Citations

1,7k

Views

577

Downloads

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to understand the public’s expectations regarding type 2 diabetes prevention and to identify factors associated with willingness to participate in preventive activities among adults in Poland.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out using a computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) on a representative sample of 1,046 adults in Poland. A non-probability quota sampling method was used. A study tool was a self-prepared questionnaire.

Results: Most respondents (77.3%) declared willingness to participate in preventive activities. Consultation with a diabetologist (75.1%) or family doctor consultation (74.9%) were the most often selected. Lifestyle interventions in the form of dietary and culinary workshops (58.1%) were the least chosen. Having higher education (OR = 3.83, 1.64–8.94, p = 0.002), chronic diseases (OR = 1.36, 1.01–1.85, p = 0.04), and a history of diabetes in the family (OR = 1.67, 1.21–2.30, p = 0.002) were significantly associated with a higher interest in type 2 diabetes prevention.

Conclusion: The adults in Poland are keen on participating in diabetes prevention programs, mostly those based on medical counselling rather than lifestyle-oriented interventions. Educational level was the most important factor associated with willingness to participate in type 2 diabetes prevention.

Introduction

Type 2 diabetes, a prevalent chronic disease, imposes a substantial burden on individuals and societies worldwide, resulting in multifaceted health, social, and economic costs. The prevalence of type 2 diabetes has reached pandemic proportions, with an estimated global prevalence of 9.3% in 2019, affecting over 463 million people, and is projected to rise to 10.9% by 2045 [1]. The health-related consequences of type 2 diabetes encompass a range of complications, including cardiovascular disease, neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy, all of which contribute to reduced quality of life and increased mortality rates [1].

Beyond the direct health impact, type 2 diabetes exerts substantial social and economic costs [2, 3]. It necessitates ongoing medical care, including medication and monitoring, straining healthcare systems and increasing healthcare expenditures [2]. Furthermore, individuals with type 2 diabetes often experience reduced productivity and missed workdays due to illness and medical appointments, affecting their economic wellbeing and placing a financial burden on society [3].

The preventable nature of type 2 diabetes underscores the pivotal role of patient involvement in effective diabetes prevention strategies [1, 4]. Recent research has demonstrated that lifestyle modifications, including dietary improvements, increased physical activity, and weight management, can significantly reduce the risk of developing type 2 diabetes among high-risk individuals [4, 5]. These interventions necessitate active patient engagement, demanding sustained behavioral changes and adherence to health-promoting practices. Patient involvement extends beyond mere compliance with medical recommendations; it encompasses education, empowerment, and self-management skills, all of which are integral to the success of diabetes prevention efforts [6]. Encouraging individuals to take an active role in their health and providing them with the necessary tools and support to make informed decisions and sustain healthy lifestyles are paramount in the fight against type 2 diabetes.

There is an increasing recognition of the need to take measures to reduce the risk, detect early, and limit the consequences of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes prevention has become a priority at the global [7], regional [8], and national levels.

In Poland, central and local authorities are taking action to prevent diabetes under The National Health Programme 2021–2025 [9]. Nonetheless, type 2 diabetes prevalence in Poland is on the rise [10]. It is estimated that the number of patients diagnosed with diabetes exceeds 2.5 million [11], and up to a million are unaware of the diagnosis [12].

Preventing type 2 diabetes involves two main strategies: primary and secondary prevention. Primary prevention aims to reduce the occurrence and progression of the condition in individuals without diabetes who are at risk due to factors such as obesity, physical inactivity, and poor dietary habits [13]. Lifestyle modification programs are crucial in primary prevention, focusing on behavioural changes like healthy eating, regular exercise, and weight management to lower the risk of developing type 2 diabetes [14]. Secondary prevention involves early detection of the disease in seemingly healthy individuals who have subclinical forms of diabetes. Secondary prevention strategies often involve targeted [15] or opportunistic [16] screening (mainly blood sugar testing) and advice or counselling provided by medical professionals (i.e., brief intervention) [17].

Barriers to effective preventive actions include organizational issues such as administrative or financial limitations [18, 19], as well as participants’ dependent factors that limit attendance in offered activities [20, 21]. The importance of determining the scope/method of intervention following participant expectations and capabilities [22] and selecting the appropriate outreach [23] strategies to reach the proper target population was underlined.

Therefore, the objective of this study was to characterize public expectations and needs relating to type 2 diabetes prevention and identify factors associated with willingness to participate in activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention among adults in Poland as determinants of the effectiveness of preventive measures.

Methods

Study Design and Sample

This cross-sectional study was conducted between 15 and 18 September 2023 on a representative sample of 1,046 adults in Poland.

Data were collected using a computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technique by the professional public opinion research company (Nationwide Research Panel Ariadna, Warsaw, Poland), which acted on behalf of the research team [24]. The participants in the survey were chosen from a pool of over 100,000 registered and verified individuals who actively participate in web-based surveys conducted by the public opinion research company [24]. A non-probability quota sampling method was used, with a stratification model that accounted for variables such as gender, age, size, and location of the place of residence. This stratification was based on sociodemographic datasets collected and published by the Central Statistical Office of the Republic of Poland in Warsaw. Similar methods were used in previous population-based cross-sectional studies in Poland [25, 26].

This study was approved by the Ethical Review Board at the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, decision number 404/2023 as of 23 August 2023.

Participants and Public Involvement

Participants in this study were not involved in developing the design or recruitment. Results will be disseminated via publication in an open-access journal.

Measures

The questionnaire was self-prepared and based on a literature review [1520]. The study questionnaire included ten questions on public health interventions related to type 2 diabetes prevention. Additionally, questions on sociodemographic characteristics were addressed. A pilot survey was carried out. A group of 11 adults (aged from 19 to 73 years) filled out the questionnaire twice, 7 days apart. Responses from the pilot survey were analyzed and two questions (including answer options) were modified to clarify the text.

Willingness to participate in activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention: Respondents were asked about their willingness to participate in activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention, using the question: „Would you like to take advantage of activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes?” with a 5-point Likert scale.

Public interest in various activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention: Respondents were asked about their interest in various activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention, using the question: “Which activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention would you like to take advantage of?” with ten mutually nonexclusive answers. Respondents were asked to select “yes” or “no” for each answer choice.

Health status: Respondents were asked about their health status, using the following questions: “Has ever doctor said that you had diabetes?” (If yes, which type of diabetes you had diagnosed: type 1, type 2, gestational diabetes, other types of diabetes, I do not remember), and “Do you have chronic diseases or health problems lasting at least 6 months (yes/no). Moreover, respondents were asked about the history of diabetes in the family, using the question: “Does anyone in your immediate family have diabetes (e.g., children, parents, siblings, grandparents)?” (yes/no).

Sociodemographic characteristics included gender, age, educational level, marital status, having children, place of residence, number of household members, occupational status (active—currently employed or self-employed or passive—unemployed, retired, student), and self-declared financial status.

Data Analysis

Data were analyzed using SPSS package version 28 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). The distribution of categorical variables was presented with frequencies and proportions. Cross-tabulations and chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables. The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Characteristics of the Study Population

This study is based on responses from 1,046 adults in Poland (53.4% were females). Among the respondents, 43.6% had chronic diseases, and 14.1% were diagnosed with diabetes (Table 1). Over one-third of respondents (36.7%) declared a history of diabetes in the immediate family (Table 1).

TABLE 1

Variable Total sample N = 1,046
n %
Gender
 Female 559 53.4
 Male 487 46.6
Age (years)
 18–29 179 17.1
 30–39 230 22.0
 40–49 180 17.2
 50–59 122 11.7
 60+ 335 32.0
Educational level
 Primary 25 2.4
 Vocational 102 9.8
 Secondary 450 43.0
 Higher 469 44.8
Marital status
 Single 280 26.8
 Married 552 52.8
 Informal relationship 173 16.5
 Divorced/widowed 41 3.9
Having children
 Yes 696 66.5
 No 350 33.5
Place of residence
 Rural area 378 36.1
 City below 20,000 inhabitants 127 12.1
 City from 20,000 to 99,999 inhabitants 215 20.6
 City from 100,000 to 499,999 inhabitants 191 18.3
 City above 500,000 inhabitants 135 12.9
Number of household members
 1 176 16.8
 2 369 35.3
 3 or more 501 47.9
Occupational status
 Active 596 57.0
 Passive 450 43.0
Financial status
 Good 465 44.5
 Moderate 371 35.5
 Bad 210 20.1
History of diabetes in the family
 Yes 384 36.7
 No 662 63.3
Presence of chronic diseases
 Yes 456 43.6
 No 590 56.4
Having diabetes diagnosed by a doctor
 Yes 148 14.1
 No 898 85.9

Characteristics of the study population (N = 1,046) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Public Expectations and Needs Related to Type 2 Diabetes Prevention

Most of the respondents (77.3%) declared willingness (definitely yes or rather yes) to take advantage of activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (Table 2). Out of 10 different diabetes prevention measures analyzed in this study, having a blood glucose level measurement performed at a pharmacy (75.4%), medical consultation with a diabetologist (75.1%), family doctor consultation (74.9%), dietary consultation (71.8%), and BMI calculation (70.6%) were the most common type 2 diabetes prevention measures expected by public in Poland (Table 2).

TABLE 2

Variable Total sample N = 1,046
n %
Would you like to take advantage of activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes?
 Definitely yes 409 39.1
 Rather yes 400 38.2
 Rather no 81 7.7
 Definitely no 32 3.1
 Difficult to tell 124 11.9
Which activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention, would you like to take advantage of? – positive answers
 Blood glucose level measurement performed at a pharmacy 789 75.4
 Medical consultation with a diabetologist 786 75.1
 Family doctor consultation 783 74.9
 Dietary consultation 751 71.8
 height and weight measurement (BMI calculation) 738 70.6
 Sports activities 673 64.3
 Advice on physical activity 645 61.7
 Consultation with a health educator or nurse 633 60.5
 Dietary or culinary workshops 608 58.1
 Outdoor events or stands during special events (e.g., “health picnic”) 602 57.6

Public expectations and needs related to type 2 diabetes prevention (N = 1,046) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Sociodemographic Differences in Public Expectations Towards Type 2 Diabetes Prevention

There were sociodemographic differences in public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (Table 3). Respondents with higher education (84.0%) more often declared interest in type 2 diabetes prevention measures compared to other educational groups (p < 0.001). The lowest percentage of respondents who declared willingness to participate in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes was observed among respondents who declared being single (68.2%; <0.001). Respondents with a history of diabetes in the family more often declared willingness to participate in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes compared to those without a history of diabetes in the family (82.8% vs. 74.2%; p = 0.001). Moreover, respondents with chronic diseases more often declared interest in type 2 diabetes prevention measures (80.9% vs. 74.6%; p = 0.02) compared to healthy individuals (Table 3).

TABLE 3

Variable Would you like to take advantage of activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes? – responses definitely yes or rather yes
Total sample (N = 1,046)
n % p
Gender
 Female 431 77.1 0.8
 Male 378 77.6
Age (years)
 18–29 138 77.1 0.8
 30–39 174 75.7
 40–49 145 80.6
 50–59 96 78.7
 60+ 256 76.4
Educational level
 Primary 14 56.0 <0.001
 Vocational 73 71.6
 Secondary 328 72.9
 Higher 394 84.0
Marital status
 Single 191 68.2 <0.001
 Married 444 80.4
 Informal relationship 142 82.1
 Divorced/widowed 32 78.0
Having children
 Yes 547 78.6 0.2
 No 262 74.9
Place of residence
 Rural area 302 79.9 0.2
 City below 20,000 inhabitants 89 70.1
 City from 20,000 to 99,999 inhabitants 171 79.5
 City from 100,000 to 499,999 inhabitants 145 75.9
 City above 500,000 inhabitants 102 75.6
Number of household members
 1 129 73.3 0.2
 2 294 79.7
 3 or more 386 77.0
Occupational status
 Active 468 78.5 0.3
 Passive 341 75.8
Financial status
 Good 371 79.8 0.2
 Moderate 279 75.2
 Bad 159 75.7
History of diabetes in the family
 Yes 318 82.8 0.001
 No 491 74.2
Presence of chronic diseases
 Yes 369 80.9 0.02
 No 440 74.6
Having diabetes diagnosed by a doctor
 Yes 120 81.1 0.2
 No 689 76.7

Sociodemographic differences in public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (N = 1,046) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Bold font was used to mark the results that met the statistical significance criteria (p < 0.05).

There were sociodemographic differences in public expectations towards activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention (Table 4). Having a family member diagnosed with diabetes had a significant influence on the likelihood of choosing all but one (consultation with a family doctor, p = 0.1) preventive services. Marital status was also linked to significant differences in preferences. Single respondents were less likely to opt for all but two (advice on physical activity, p = 0.3 and sports activities, p = 0.08) preventive actions. People diagnosed with diabetes more often than healthy respondents declared a willingness to participate in 6 out of 10 preventive activities. The self-declared financial status of respondents had no significant influence on their preferences, and the place of residence was linked only with a higher interest in outdoor events or stands during special events (61.1% vs. 48.9% in the biggest cities, p = 0.03).

TABLE 4

Variable Dietary consultation Dietary or culinary workshops Advice on physical activity Sports activities BMI calculation
n % p n % p n % p n % p n % p
Gender
 Female 424 75.8 0.002 361 64.6 <0.001 354 63.3 0.2 375 67.1 0.04 406 72.6 0.1
 Male 327 67.1 247 50.7 291 59.8 298 61.2 332 68.2
Age (years)
 18–29 127 70.9 0.9 118 65.9 0.2 117 65.4 0.6 121 67.6 0.01 115 64.2 0.2
 30–39 166 72.2 136 59.1 148 64.3 161 70.0 167 72.6
 40–49 128 71.1 102 56.7 107 59.4 121 67.2 125 69.4
 50–59 86 70.5 65 53.3 73 59.8 79 64.8 83 68.0
 60+ 244 72.8 187 55.8 200 59.7 191 57.0 248 74.0
Educational level
 Primary 17 68.0 0.04 15 60.0 0.4 16 64.0 0.4 13 52.0 0.01 15 60.0 0.6
 Vocational 62 60.8 52 51.0 55 53.9 53 52.0 69 67.6
 Secondary 321 71.3 260 57.8 277 61.6 286 63.6 319 70.9
 Higher 351 74.8 281 59.9 297 63.3 321 68.4 335 71.4
Marital status
 Single 180 64.3 0.01 145 51.8 0.02 160 57.1 0.3 164 58.6 0.08 169 60.4 <0.001
 Married 413 74.8 325 58.9 349 63.2 361 65.4 416 75.4
 Informal relationship 125 72.3 108 62.4 110 63.6 121 69.9 122 70.5
 Divorced/widowed 33 80.5 30 73.2 26 63.4 27 65.9 31 75.6
Having children
 Yes 513 73.7 0.05 404 58.0 0.9 436 62.6 0.4 449 64.5 0.9 512 73.6 0.003
 No 238 68.0 204 58.3 209 59.7 224 64.0 226 64.6
Place of residence
 Rural area 288 76.2 0.2 228 60.3 0.6 243 64.3 0.4 250 66.1 0.7 272 72.0 0.8
 City below 20,000 inhabitants 89 70.1 68 53.5 73 57.5 76 59.8 84 66.1
 City from 20,000 to 99,999 inhabitants 148 68.8 123 57.2 131 60.9 134 62.3 152 70.7
 City from 100,000 to 499,999 inhabitants 134 70.2 107 56.0 122 63.9 125 65.4 136 71.2
 City above 500,000 inhabitants 92 68.1 82 60.7 76 56.3 88 65.2 94 69.6
Number of household members
 1 121 68.8 0.6 102 58.0 0.8 101 57.4 0.2 108 61.4 0.1 115 65.3 0.3
 2 265 71.8 210 56.9 222 60.2 227 61.5 264 71.5
 3 or more 365 72.9 296 59.1 322 64.3 338 67.5 359 71.7
Occupational status
 Active 421 70.6 0.3 347 58.2 0.9 367 61.6 0.9 410 68.8 <0.001 416 69.8 0.5
 Passive 330 73.3 261 58.0 278 61.8 263 58.4 322 71.6
Financial status
 Good 340 73.1 0.7 275 59.1 0.5 293 63.0 0.7 314 67.5 0.2 332 71.4 0.9
 Moderate 264 71.2 219 59.0 224 60.4 229 61.7 260 70.1
 Bad 147 70.0 114 54.3 128 61.0 130 61.9 146 69.5
History of diabetes in the family
 Yes 295 76.8 0.006 252 65.6 <0.001 255 66.4 0.02 276 71.9 <0.001 289 75.3 0.01
 No 456 68.9 356 53.8 390 58.9 397 60.0 449 67.8
Presence of chronic diseases
 Yes 346 75.9 0.01 275 60.3 0.2 295 64.7 0.08 295 64.7 0.8 329 72.1 0.3
 No 405 68.6 333 56.4 350 59.3 378 64.1 409 69.3
Having diabetes diagnosed by a doctor
 Yes 118 79.7 0.02 98 66.2 0.03 107 72.3 0.01 100 67.6 0.4 117 79.1 0.01
 No 633 70.5 510 56.8 538 59.9 573 63.8 621 69.2
(Continued on following page)

Sociodemographic differences in public expectations towards activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention (N = 1,046) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Bold font was used to mark the results that met the statistical significance criteria (p < 0.05).

Factors Associated With Public Expectations Towards Participation in Activities Aimed at Preventing Type 2 Diabetes

In multivariable logistic regression, having higher education (OR: 3.83, 95% CI: 1.64–8.94, p = 0.002), having chronic diseases (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.01–1.85, p = 0.04), and history of diabetes in the family (OR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.21–2.30, p = 0.002) were significantly associated with higher interest in participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (Table 5). A separated analysis was performed for participants without diagnosis of diabetes (n = 898), also confirmed that having higher education (OR: 3.84, 95%CI: 1.53–9.68, p = 0.004), history of diabetes in the family (OR: 1.86, 95%CI: 1.30–2.65, p < 0.001) and presence of chronic diseases (OR: 1.64, 95%CI: 1.16–2.30, p = 0.01) were significantly associated with higher interest in participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (Table 6).

TABLE 5

Variable Factors associated with public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (N = 1,046)
Univariable logistic regression Multivariable logistic regression
OR 95%CI p OR 95% CI p
Gender
 Female 0.97 0.73–1.30 0.8
 Male Reference
Age (years)
 18–29 1.04 0.68–1.60 0.9
 30–39 0.96 0.65–1.42 0.8
 40–49 1.28 0.82–2.00 0.3
 50–59 1.14 0.69–1.88 0.6
 60+ Reference
Educational level
 Primary Reference Reference
 Vocational 1.98 0.80–4.86 0.1 1.81 0.72–4.56 0.2
 Secondary 2.11 0.93–4.78 0.07 2.00 0.87–4.62 0.09
 Higher 4.13 1.81–9.44 <0.001 3.83 1.64–8.94 0.002
Marital status
 Married 1.45 1.09–1.94 0.01 1.31 0.98–1.77 0.08
 Unmarried Reference Reference
Having children
 Yes 1.23 0.91–1.67 0.2
 No Reference
Place of residence
 Rural area 1.29 0.81–2.05 0.3
 City below 20,000 inhabitants 0.76 0.44–1.31 0.3
 City from 20,000 to 99,999 inhabitants 1.26 0.75–2.10 0.4
 City from 100,000 to 499,999 inhabitants 1.02 0.61–1.71 0.9
 City above 500,000 inhabitants Reference
Number of household members
 1 0.82 0.55–1.21 0.3
 2 1.17 0.84–1.62 0.4
 3 or more Reference
Occupational status
 Active 1.17 0.87–1.56 0.3
 Passive Reference
Financial status
 Good 1.27 0.86–1.87 0.2
 Moderate 0.97 0.66–1.44 0.9
 Bad Reference
History of diabetes in the family
 Yes 1.68 1.22–2.30 0.001 1.67 1.21–2.30 0.002
 No Reference Reference
Presence of chronic diseases
 Yes 1.45 1.07–1.95 0.02 1.36 1.01–1.85 0.04
 No Reference Reference
Having diabetes diagnosed by a doctor
 Yes 1.30 0.84–2.02 0.2
 No Reference

Factors associated with public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes (N = 1,046) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Bold font was used to mark the results that met the statistical significance criteria (p < 0.05).

TABLE 6

Variable Factors associated with public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes among those without diabetes (N = 898)
Univariable logistic regression Multivariable logistic regression
OR 95%CI p OR 95% CI p
Gender
 Female 1.02 0.75–1.40 0.9
 Male Reference
Age (years)
 18–29 1.10 0.69–1.75 0.7
 30–39 0.89 0.58–1.37 0.6
 40–49 1.18 0.73–1.91 0.6
 50–59 1.04 0.61–1.76 0.9
 60+ Reference
Educational level
 Primary Reference Reference
 Vocational 2.39 0.90–6.34 0.08 2.20 0.80–6.04 0.1
 Secondary 2.48 1.02–6.01 0.04 2.32 0.93–5.77 0.07
 Higher 4.22 1.73–10.31 0.002 3.84 1.53–9.68 0.004
Marital status
 Married 1.42 1.04–1.93 0.03 1.26 0.91–1.74 0.2
 Unmarried Reference Reference
Having children
 Yes 1.14 0.83–1.57 0.4
 No Reference
Place of residence
 Rural area 1.36 0.82–2.26 0.2
 City below 20,000 inhabitants 0.71 0.39–1.27 0.2
 City from 20,000 to 99,999 inhabitants 1.23 0.71–2.14 0.5
 City from 100,000 to 499,999 inhabitants 0.96 0.55–1.67 0.9
 City above 500,000 inhabitants Reference
Number of household members
 1 0.82 0.54–1.25 0.4
 2 1.17 0.82–1.66 0.4
 3 or more Reference
Occupational status
 Active 1.10 0.80–1.51 0.6
 Passive Reference
Financial status
 Good 1.11 0.73–1.68 0.6
 Moderate 0.88 0.57–1.34 0.5
 Bad Reference
History of diabetes in the family
 Yes 1.83 1.29–2.59 <0.001 1.86 1.30–2.65 <0.001
 No Reference Reference
Presence of chronic diseases
 Yes 1.74 1.25–2.44 0.001 1.64 1.16–2.30 0.01
 No Reference Reference

Factors associated with public expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes among those without diabetes (N = 898) (Warsaw, Poland, 2023).

Bold font was used to mark the results that met the statistical significance criteria (p < 0.05).

Discussion

To the authors’ best knowledge, this is the first study on the expectations and needs relating to type 2 diabetes prevention and on factors associated with willingness to participate in activities aimed at type 2 diabetes prevention among adults in Poland. Most of the respondents declared interest in diabetes-preventing activities was high. Out of Educational level, history of diabetes in the family and presence of chronic diseases were significantly associated with expectations towards participation in activities aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes among those without diabetes, both among all participants as well as those without diabetes.

Those results correspond to the previously published data [27] on the awareness of diabetes in Polish adults. As it was recently confirmed by Sękowski et al. [11], knowledge of diabetes in Poland is strongly related to the patient’s level of education. Rising awareness of diabetes among Polish adults, its risk factors and symptoms results in higher readiness to participate in diabetes prevention actions. However, an educational gradient of this attitude may result in greater health inequalities [28], as only a part of the population is ready to take advantage of such preventive measures. This is especially of consideration in the case of Poland, where a substantial part of the population had never undergone a blood glucose test [29], and the number of undiagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes is estimated to be up to 1 million [30].

Most of the respondents declared willingness to participate in diabetes prevention activities based on healthcare services such as blood sugar tests, consultations with specialists (diabetologists) and family doctors. Lifestyle-related interventions were the least chosen. Those preferences towards medical services and, in consequence, secondary prevention may be due to two reasons.

The Polish health system is considered to have problems in meeting the health needs of the society [31, 32]. Therefore, patients may prefer actions that provide them with the opportunities to meet the demand for health services. This seems especially true for the oldest patients (60+ age group), who most often choose the medical interventions through consultations with a family doctor or a diabetologist (89.5% and 80%, respectively). The inadequate availability of medical services is also perceived as a problem by doctors who provide such services to senior patients [33].

On the other hand, the knowledge of lifestyle-related risk factors for diabetes remains inadequate in Poland [12]. This may result in higher demand for services that meet the social notion of effective diabetes prevention.

Numerous studies have determined the influence of physical activity and exercise on health outcomes. The research indicates that physical activity increases the quality of life and lowers death rates with little to no safety issues [34]. A recent study by Biernat et al. [35] revealed low declared physical activity levels among Poland’s adults. It showed that the likelihood of participation in physical activities depends among other things, on age and education level. Those findings correspond with the results of this study in which sports activities, as a form of diabetes prevention, were chosen mostly by younger participants (70% in the 30–39 age group) with higher education (68.4%) and active occupational status (68.8%). The latter correlates with the findings of Meyer et al. [36], who showed that higher socio-economic status was associated with involvement in all intensity levels of physical activity.

The diet is a second lifestyle factor considered key in diabetes prevention and mitigation of its complications [37]. Some studies show that due to dietary intake, never-married men in Poland manifest, on average, higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure [38] – as risk factors for diabetes [39] and common comorbidities [40]. Despite those circumstances, single respondents were less willing to participate in all diet-related activities (culinary workshops, dietary consultations). Moreover, being single was also negatively correlated with lower preferences towards all consultations with healthcare professionals (family doctors, diabetologists, nurses and educators). Contrasted with, on average, lower quality of life and perceived health condition observed among non-married adults in Poland [41], the attitude of single adults towards preventive health services identified in this study poses a serious challenge.

The results of this study also demonstrated that having a family member with diabetes increases the willingness to participate in all but one (consultation with family doctor) activities. We can hypnotically assume that this is because diabetes has a particular characteristic in that it is a chronic disease that typically manifests in older age, and the patient frequently needs family support and involvement in disease management. Therefore, the patient’s family may have a higher-than-average understanding of this disease (its risk factors and its prevention), as reported by Sękowski et al. [12]. These may complement proper diabetic education that should be offered as part of a public health intervention on diabetes but should not be used in its place. This study has practical implications for the implementation of a community pharmacist-physician collaborative working model in Poland. This study revealed that there is a need to strengthen the role of pharmacists in interprofessional care. Pharmacists should be encouraged to perform drug reviews and report drug interactions and polypharmacy. Pharmacist-physician collaborative working should be included in postgraduate training programs. Both groups should improve communication skills and learn how to build proper relationships based on respect and trust. There is also a need to promote the role of the pharmacist in the healthcare system - no longer as a distributor of drugs, but as an advisor and consultant in matters related to pharmacotherapy [18]. Public authorities should remove barriers to pharmacist-physician collaborative working. Pharmacists should gain access to basic electronic health records that are necessary for pharmaceutical care [16, 42]. Moreover, the development of clear guidelines on what information should be recorded in the patients’ records from the point of view of optimizing pharmacotherapy will also contribute to better cooperation between pharmacists and physicians.

Practical Implications

Numerous practical ramifications for public health actions in Poland can be drawn from this study. It shows a high level of interest in participating in diabetes prevention activities among adults in Poland. This interest is, however, directed towards medical services, while willingness to participate in lifestyle interventions is lower.

This finding emphasizes a need for improved education on diabetes, with special consideration for its risk factors and prevention methods. It is important to pay close attention to communication addressed to individuals with lower education, as that group was identified as less likely to participate in any diabetes prevention activities. Single males, especially those not active in the labour market, should be approached with targeted actions focusing on lifestyle risk factors and prevention methods of diabetes.

Moreover, this study provides evidence of inadequate education of patients diagnosed with diabetes in Poland and their low motivation to participate in activities that could prevent or delay complications of their disease. The results of this study also highlight the beneficial effect that having a family member with diabetes has on the degree of diabetes awareness among other family members.

The findings of this study can have implications for other countries, particularly those that are facing similar epidemics and economic challenges, like the former Eastern block countries. Nonetheless, it’s important to consider that social and cultural differences may also play a role.

Limitations

This research has several limitations. The CAWI research approach was used to conduct the study, which forgoes direct interaction between the interviewer and the respondent (for example, the ability to judge the respondents’ abilities and capacity to comprehend the questions posed). The study’s questionnaire was restricted to the most common activities offered in the Polish health system. Due to the study’s design, medical records were not validated, and participants self-reported health information and information on their family health history. Nevertheless, this is the most thorough and recent survey on the general public’s attitude towards diabetes prevention activities conducted among adults in Poland.

Conclusion

The findings of the study were unequivocal and demonstrated a remarkable level of interest among Polish adults in activities aimed at preventing diabetes. Notably, the education level of respondents emerged as a crucial and statistically significant factor linked to their willingness to participate in such activities. Additionally, the study revealed a preference for medical interventions over lifestyle-oriented interventions, with only younger, better-educated, and working respondents showing a greater inclination towards the latter.

These results underscore the importance of comprehensive diabetes education, particularly in relation to lifestyle-related risk factors and prevention methods.

Statements

Ethics Statement

Ethical approval was received from the Ethics Committee at the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education in Warsaw, Poland (approval number: 404/2023). All participants declared informed consent to participate. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

All authors JG-S, KS, JP, and MJ have contributed significantly to this work, have seen the contents of the manuscript and agreed to its submission.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest.

References

  • 1

    Cho NH Shaw JE Karuranga S Huang Y da Rocha Fernandes JD Ohlrogge AW et al IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global Estimates of Diabetes Prevalence for 2017 and Projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract (2018) 138:27181. 10.1016/j.diabres.2018.02.023

  • 2

    American Diabetes Association. Economic Costs of Diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care (2018) 41(5):91728. 10.2337/dci18-0007

  • 3

    Bommer C Heesemann E Sagalova V Manne-Goehler J Atun R Bärnighausen T et al The Global Economic Burden of Diabetes in Adults Aged 20-79 Years: A Cost-Of-Illness Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol (2017) 5(6):42330. 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30097-9

  • 4

    Knowler WC Barrett-Connor E Fowler SE Hamman RF Lachin JM Walker EA et al Reduction in the Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes With Lifestyle Intervention or Metformin. N Engl J Med (2002) 346(6):393403. 10.1056/NEJMoa012512

  • 5

    Lindström J Ilanne-Parikka P Peltonen M Aunola S Eriksson JG Hemiö K et al Sustained Reduction in the Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes by Lifestyle Intervention: Follow-Up of the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. Lancet (2006) 368(9548):16739. 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69701-8

  • 6

    Lambrinou E Hansen TB Beulens JW . Lifestyle Factors, Self-Management and Patient Empowerment in Diabetes Care. Eur J Prev Cardiol (2019) 26(2):5563. 10.1177/2047487319885455

  • 7

    World Health Organisation. The WHO Global Diabetes Compact (2023). Available from: https://www.who.int/initiatives/the-who-global-diabetes-compact (Accessed October 7, 2023).

  • 8

    Mahrouseh N Lovas S Njuguna DW Nellamkuzhi NJ Soares Andrade CA Sackey WE et al How the European Union Legislations Are Tackling the Burden of Diabetes Mellitus: A Legal Surveillance Study. Front Public Health (2022) 10:1002265. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1002265

  • 9

    European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Poland's National Health Program for 2016-20 (2023). Available from: https://www.emcdda.europa.eu/drugs-library/polands-national-health-program-2016-20_en (Accessed October 7, 2023).

  • 10

    Topor-Madry R Wojtyniak B Strojek K Rutkowski D Bogusławski S Ignaszewska-Wyrzykowska A et al Prevalence of Diabetes in Poland: A Combined Analysis of National Databases. Diabet Med (2019) 36(10):120916. 10.1111/dme.13949

  • 11

    Towpik I Walicka M Marcinkowska K Lisicka I Raczyńska M Wierzba W et al Epidemiology of Diabetes in Poland in 2014–2017. Clin Diabet (2020) 9(5):27985. 10.5603/dk.2020.0033

  • 12

    Sękowski K Grudziąż-Sękowska J Pinkas J Jankowski M . Public Knowledge and Awareness of Diabetes Mellitus, its Risk Factors, Complications, and Prevention Methods Among Adults in Poland-A 2022 Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey. Front Public Health (2022) 10:1029358. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1029358

  • 13

    Aziz Z Absetz P Oldroyd J Pronk NP Oldenburg B . A Systematic Review of Real-World Diabetes Prevention Programs: Learnings From the Last 15 Years. Implement Sci (2015) 10:172. 10.1186/s13012-015-0354-6

  • 14

    Crandall JP Knowler WC Kahn SE Marrero D Florez JC Bray GA et al The Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes. Nat Clin Pract Endocrinol Metab (2008) 4(7):38293. 10.1038/ncpendmet0843

  • 15

    Peer N Balakrishna Y Durao S . Screening for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2020) 5(5):CD005266. 10.1002/14651858.CD005266.pub2

  • 16

    Gnavi R Sciannameo V Baratta F Scarinzi C Parente M Mana M et al Opportunistic Screening for Type 2 Diabetes in Community Pharmacies. Results From a Region-Wide Experience in Italy. PLoS One (2020) 15(3):e0229842. 10.1371/journal.pone.0229842

  • 17

    Merakou K Knithaki A Karageorgos G Theodoridis D Barbouni A . Group Patient Education: Effectiveness of a Brief Intervention in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Primary Health Care in Greece: A Clinically Controlled Trial. Health Educ Res (2015) 30(2):22332. 10.1093/her/cyv001

  • 18

    Ariel-Donges AH Gordon EL Dixon BN Eastman AJ Bauman V Ross KM et al Rural/Urban Disparities in Access to the National Diabetes Prevention Program. Transl Behav Med (2020) 10(6):15548. 10.1093/tbm/ibz098

  • 19

    Ali MK McKeever Bullard K Imperatore G Benoit SR Rolka DB Albright AL et al Reach and Use of Diabetes Prevention Services in the United States, 2016-2017. JAMA Netw Open (2019) 2(5):e193160. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3160

  • 20

    Sargeant LA Simmons RK Barling RS Butler R Williams KM Prevost AT et al Who Attends a UK Diabetes Screening Programme? Findings From the ADDITION-Cambridge Study. Diabet Med (2010) 27(9):9951003. 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03056.x

  • 21

    Green BB Anderson ML Ralston JD Catz S Fishman PA Cook AJ . Patient Ability and Willingness to Participate in a Web-Based Intervention to Improve Hypertension Control. J Med Internet Res (2011) 13(1):e1. 10.2196/jmir.1625

  • 22

    Almeida FA You W Brito FA Alves TF Goessl C Wall SS et al A Randomized Controlled Trial to Test the Effectiveness of Two Technology-Enhanced Diabetes Prevention Programs in Primary Care: The DiaBEAT-It Study. Front Public Health (2023) 11:1000162. 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1000162

  • 23

    alkanen K Järvenpää R Tilles-Tirkkonen T Martikainen J Aarnio E Männikkö R et al Comparison of Communication Channels for Large-Scale Type 2 Diabetes Risk Screening and Intervention Recruitment: Empirical Study. JMIR Diabetes (2021) 6(3):e21356. 10.2196/21356

  • 24

    The Nationwide Research Panel Ariadna. The Nationwide Research Panel Ariadna About the Panel (2023). Available from: https://panelariadna.com/ (accessed on October 26, 2023).

  • 25

    Kamińska A Jankowski M Rejdak MB Ostrowski J Rejdak R Pinkas J . An Online Questionnaire-Based Survey of 1076 Individuals in Poland to Identify the Prevalence of Ophthalmic Symptoms in Autumn 2022. Med Sci Monit (2023) 29:e939622. 10.12659/MSM.939622

  • 26

    Kamińska A Pinkas J Jankowski M . Factors Associated With the Frequency of Eye Examinations Among Adults in Poland - A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey, December 2022. Ann Agric Environ Med (2023) 30(2):28795. 10.26444/aaem/159152

  • 27

    Sobierajski T . Coalition for Fight Against Diabetes. Report: Social Image of Diabetes (2023). Available from: https://nazdrowie.pl/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Spo%C5%82eczny-obraz-cukrzycy_raport.pdf (Accessed October 7, 2023).

  • 28

    Hill-Briggs F Adler NE Berkowitz SA Chin MH Gary-Webb TL Navas-Acien A et al Social Determinants of Health and Diabetes: A Scientific Review. Diabetes Care (2020) 44(1):25879. 10.2337/dci20-0053

  • 29

    Grudziąż-Sękowska J Sękowski KB Pinkas J Jankowski M . Blood Glucose Level Testing in Poland - Do Socio-Economic Factors Influence its Frequency? A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey. Ann Agric Environ Med (2023) 30(3):4839. 10.26444/aaem/162964

  • 30

    Zatońska K Basiak-Rasała A Różańska D Karczewski M Wołyniec M Szuba A et al Changes in Diabetes Prevalence and Corresponding Risk Factors - Findings From 3- and 6-Year Follow-Up of PURE Poland Cohort Study. BMC Public Health (2020) 20(1):843. 10.1186/s12889-020-08970-5

  • 31

    Sowada C Sagan A Kowalska-Bobko I Badora-Musial K Bochenek T Domagala A et al Poland: Health System Review. Health Syst Transit (2019) 21(1):1234.

  • 32

    Holecki T Romaniuk P Woźniak-Holecka J Szromek AR Syrkiewicz-Świtała M . Mapping Health Needs to Support Health System Management in Poland. Front Public Health (2018) 6:82. 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00082

  • 33

    Krztoń-Królewiecka A Oleszczyk M Schäfer W Boerma WG Windak A . Quality of Primary Health Care in Poland From the Perspective of the Physicians Providing it. BMC Fam Pract (2016) 17(1):151. 10.1186/s12875-016-0550-8

  • 34

    Posadzki P Pieper D Bajpai R Makaruk H Könsgen N Neuhaus AL et al Exercise/Physical Activity and Health Outcomes: An Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews. BMC Public Health (2020) 20(1):1724. 10.1186/s12889-020-09855-3

  • 35

    Biernat E Krzepota J Sadowska D . Active or Passive Aging? Analysis of Selected Socioeconomic Factors in the Polish Population. Int J Environ Res Public Health (2023) 20(6):4683. 10.3390/ijerph20064683

  • 36

    Meyer K Rezny L Breuer C Lamprecht M Stamm HP . Physical Activity of Adults Aged 50 Years and Older in Switzerland. Soz Praventivmed (2005) 50(4):21829. 10.1007/s00038-005-4093-3

  • 37

    Uusitupa M Khan TA Viguiliouk E Kahleova H Rivellese AA Hermansen K et al Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes by Lifestyle Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients (2019) 11(11):2611. 10.3390/nu11112611

  • 38

    Lipowicz A Lopuszanska M . Marital Differences in Blood Pressure and the Risk of Hypertension Among Polish Men. Eur J Epidemiol (2005) 20(5):4217. 10.1007/s10654-005-1752-x

  • 39

    Petrie JR Guzik TJ Touyz RM . Diabetes, Hypertension, and Cardiovascular Disease: Clinical Insights and Vascular Mechanisms. Can J Cardiol (2018) 34(5):57584. 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.12.005

  • 40

    Sękowski K Grudziąż-Sękowska J Goryński P Pinkas J Jankowski M . Clinical Characteristics and Factors Associated With In-Hospital Mortality in 66 755 Patients Hospitalized Due to Diabetes in Poland, January to December 2019. Med Sci Monit (2022) 28:e938550. 10.12659/MSM.938550

  • 41

    Puciato D Rozpara M Bugdol M Mróz-Gorgoń B . Socio-Economic Correlates of Quality of Life in Single and Married Urban Individuals: A Polish Case Study. Health Qual Life Outcomes (2022) 20(1):58. 10.1186/s12955-022-01966-2

  • 42

    Al-Taie A . Implications of Health Care Providers by Physicians’ and Pharmacists’ Attitudes and Perceptive Barriers Towards Interprofessional Collaborative Practices. Braz J Pharm Sci (2022) 58. 10.1590/s2175-97902022e20983

Summary

Keywords

prevention, health education, needs assessment, diabetes mellitus, preventive health services

Citation

Grudziąż-Sękowska J, Sękowski K, Pinkas J and Jankowski M (2024) Public Expectations and Needs Related to Type 2 Diabetes Prevention: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study in Poland. Int J Public Health 69:1606790. doi: 10.3389/ijph.2024.1606790

Received

31 October 2023

Accepted

11 January 2024

Published

23 January 2024

Volume

69 - 2024

Edited by

Salvatore Panico, University of Naples Federico II, Italy

Reviewed by

Anmar Al-Taie, Istinye University, Türkiye

One reviewer who chose to remain anonymous

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Justyna Grudziąż-Sękowska,

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article