Factors influencing diabetes treatment satisfaction in the INtegrating DEPrEssioN and Diabetes treatmENT randomized clinical trial: A multilevel model analysis.

AIMS: Patient satisfaction is associated with positive diabetes outcomes. However, there are no identified studies that evaluate both patient- and clinic-level predictors influencing diabetes care satisfaction longitudinally. METHODS: Data from the INtegrating DEPrEssioN and Diabetes treatmENT trial was used to perform the analysis. We used fixed and random effects models to assess whether and how changes in patient-level predictors (treatment assignment, depression symptom severity, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, LDL cholesterol, and haemoglobin A1C) from 0 to 24 months and clinic-level predictors (visit frequency, visit cost, number of specialists, wait time, time spent with healthcare provider, and receiving verbal reminders) measured at 24 months influence diabetes care satisfaction from 0 to 24 months. RESULTS: Model 1 (patient-level predictors) accounted for 7% of the change in diabetes satisfaction and there was a significant negative relationship between change in depressive symptoms and care satisfaction (ß = -0.23, SE = 0.12, p < 0.05). Within Model 1, 2% of the variance was explained by clinic-level predictors. Model 2 included both patient- and clinic-level predictors and accounted for 18% of the change in diabetes care satisfaction. Within Model 2, 9% of the variance was attributed to clinic-level predictors. There was also a cross-level interaction where the change in depression had less of an impact on the change in satisfaction for those who received a verbal reminder (ß = -0.11, SE = 0.21, p = 0.34) compared with those who did not receive a reminder (ß = -0.62, SE = 0.08, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Increased burden of depressive symptoms influences diabetes care satisfaction. Clinic-level predictors also significantly influence diabetes care satisfaction and can reduce dissatisfaction in primary care, specifically, reminder calls from clinic staff.

Analyzing the roles, workflows, and communication dynamics of social workers within interprofessional care teams.

Social workers frequent interprofessional healthcare teams, but few studies examine the day-to-day experiences of these providers on interprofessional teams. Our study utilized semi-structured interviews with 54 medical social workers practicing on interprofessional healthcare teams. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the day-to-day functions of these social workers. The analysis resulted in three primary themes: 1) Social Workers' Self-Perceptions of their Roles within Interprofessional Teams, 2) Social Workers Shifting Roles on Interprofessional Teams, and 3) Interprofessional Team Dynamics that Impact the Role of a Social Worker. Social workers perceived their primary roles as contributing a unique systems approach to interprofessional healthcare teams while emphasizing patient self-determination. These self-perceptions influenced their shifting roles on interprofessional healthcare teams (e.g. clinician, case manager, bridge builder). In addition to individual self-perceptions, the healthcare system infrastructure influenced social work roles. For example, social workers in outpatient settings more frequently assumed the role of a mental health practitioner compared to those in inpatient settings. Last, there was variation in interprofessional communication and workflow assignment based on the healthcare infrastructure. Future research should examine the education and training efforts of social workers and other allied health professions for interprofessional healthcare teams.

The effects of childhood maltreatment on social support, inflammation, and depressive symptoms in adulthood.

RATIONALE: Social Safety Theory (SST) suggests that social threats increase inflammation, exacerbating health risks, but that social support may decrease inflammatory signaling. One of the key health problems affected by both social forces and inflammation is major depression. OBJECTIVE: The present study sought to test aspects of the SST, to understand how social support and inflammation may mediate the effects of childhood maltreatment on depressive symptoms in adulthood. METHODS: This study utilized data from the national Midlife Development in the United States study (n = 1969; mean age 53; 77.2% White; 53.6% female) to model the effects of childhood maltreatment on depressive symptoms in adulthood and the potential serial mediating effects of social support and inflammation. Analyses were conducted via structural equation modeling, using the four subscales of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale to indicate depressive symptoms, the five subscales of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire to indicate childhood maltreatment, and the Positive Relations Scale and a network level measure of support as indicators of social support. Inflammation was indexed using C-reactive protein (CRP). The model was estimated via maximum likelihood with robust standard errors and significance of indirect effects were assessed via a Sobel test. RESULTS: Childhood maltreatment was associated with increased depressive symptoms and CRP but decreased social support. Social support was associated with decreased depressive symptoms while CRP was associated with increased depressive symptoms. Assessing indirect effects yielded no serial mediation effect; however, a significant indirect effect from childhood maltreatment to depressive symptoms through social support was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses indicate mixed support for the SST with respect to depressive symptoms. Results highlight the role of social support in mitigating the effects depressive symptoms in adulthood; although, alternative strategies may be needed to decrease the effects of childhood maltreatment on inflammation as indexed by CRP.

Social determinants of health and diabetes: using a nationally representative sample to determine which social determinant of health model best predicts diabetes risk.

OBJECTIVES: Social determinants of health (SDOH) research demonstrates poverty, access to healthcare, discrimination, and environmental factors influence health outcomes. Several models are commonly used to assess SDOH, yet there is limited understanding of how these models differ regarding their ability to predict the influence of social determinants on diabetes risk. This study compares the utility of four SDOH models for predicting diabetes disparities. STUDY DESIGN: We utilized The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adulthood (Add Health) to compare SDOH models and their ability to predict risk of diabetes and obesity. METHODS: Previous literature has identified the World Health Organization (WHO), Healthy People, County Health Rankings, and Kaiser Family Foundation as the conventional SDOH models. We used these models to operationalize SDOH using the Add Health dataset. Add Health data were used to perform logistic regressions for HbA1c and linear regressions for body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: The Kaiser model accounted for the largest proportion of variance (19%) in BMI. Race/ethnicity was a consistent factor predicting BMI across models. Regarding HbA1c, the Kaiser model also accounted for the largest proportion of variance (17%). Race/ethnicity and wealth was a consistent factor predicting HbA1c across models. CONCLUSION: Policy and practice interventions should consider these factors when screening for and addressing the effects of SDOH on diabetes risk. Specific SDOH models can be constructed for diabetes based on which determinants have the largest predictive value.

Addressing depression and comorbid health conditions through solution-focused brief therapy in an integrated care setting: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Co-occurring physical and mental health conditions are common, but effective and sustainable interventions are needed for primary care settings. PURPOSE: Our paper analyzes the effectiveness of a Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) intervention for treating depression and co-occurring health conditions in primary care. We hypothesized that individuals receiving the SFBT intervention would have statistically significant reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms, systolic blood pressure (SBP), hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), and body mass index (BMI) when compared to those in the control group. Additionally, we hypothesized that the SFBT group would have increased well-being scores compared to the control group. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted at a rural federally qualified health center. Eligible participants scored ≥ 10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and met criteria for co-occurring health conditions (hypertension, obesity, diabetes) evidenced by chart review. SFBT participants (n = 40) received three SFBT interventions over three weeks in addition to treatment as usual (TAU). The control group (n = 40) received TAU over three weeks. Measures included depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7), well-being (Human Flourishing Index), and SFBT scores, along with physical health outcomes (blood pressure, body mass index, and hemoglobin A1c). RESULTS: Of 80 consented participants, 69 completed all measures and were included in the final analysis. 80% identified as female and the mean age was 38.1 years (SD = 14.5). Most participants were white (72%) followed by Hispanic (15%) and Black (13%). When compared to TAU, SFBT intervention participants had significantly greater reductions in depression (baseline: M = 18.17, SD = 3.97, outcome: M = 9.71, SD = 3.71) and anxiety (baseline: M = 14.69, SD = 4.9, outcome: M = 8.43, SD = 3.79). SFBT intervention participants also had significantly increased well-being scores (baseline: M = 58.37, SD = 16.36, outcome: M = 73.43, SD = 14.70) when compared to TAU. Changes in BMI and blood pressure were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The SFBT intervention demonstrated efficacy in reducing depressive and anxiety symptoms and increasing well-being but did not affect cardio-metabolic parameters over a short period of intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05838222 on 4/20/2023. *M = Mean, SD = Standard deviation.

Cardiorespiratory fitness and physical activity in the lens of social justice - Reporting on the disparities that exist.

Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), heavily influenced by physical activity (PA), represents a strong and independent risk factor for a wide range of health conditions, most notably, cardiovascular disease. Substantial disparities in CRF have been identified between white and non-white populations. These disparities may partly account for group differences in susceptibility to poor health outcomes, including non-communicable disease. Race and ethnic differences in CRF may partly be explained by social injustices rooted in persistent structural and systemic racism. These forces contribute to environments that are unsupportive for opportunities to achieve optimal CRF levels. This review aims to examine, through the lens of social justice, the inequities in key social ecological factors, including socioeconomic status, the built environment, and structural racism, that underly the systemic differences in CRF and PA in vulnerable communities. Further, this review highlights current public health initiatives, as well as opportunities in future research, to address inequities and enhance CRF through the promotion of regular PA.