Development and testing of the FRESH Foods Survey to assess food pantry clients' dietary behaviours and correlates.

OBJECTIVE: To use cognitive interviewing and pilot testing to develop a survey instrument feasible for administering in the food pantry setting to assess daily intake frequency from several major food groups and dietary correlates (e.g. fruit and vegetable barriers) - the FRESH Foods Survey. DESIGN: New and existing survey items were adapted and refined following cognitive interviews. After piloting the survey with food pantry users in the USA, preliminary psychometric and construct validity analyses were performed. SETTING: Three US food banks and accompanying food pantries in Atlanta, GA, San Diego, CA, and Buffalo, NY. PARTICIPANTS: Food pantry clients (n 246), mostly female (68 %), mean age 54·5 (sd 14·7) years. RESULTS: Measures of dietary correlates performed well psychometrically: Cronbach's α range 0·71-0·90, slope (α) parameter range 1·26-6·36, and threshold parameters (ß) indicated variability in the 'difficulty' of the items. Additionally, all scales had only one eigenvalue above 1·0 (range 2·07-4·71), indicating unidimensionality. Average (median, Q1-Q3) daily intakes (times/d) across six dietary groups were: fruits and vegetables (2·87, 1·87-4·58); junk foods (1·16, 0·58-2·16); fast foods and similar entrées (1·45, 0·58-2·03); whole-grain foods (0·87, 0·58-1·71); sugar-sweetened beverages (0·58, 0·29-1·29); milk and milk alternatives (0·71, 0·29-1·29). Significant correlations between dietary groups and dietary correlates were largely in the directions expected based on the literature, giving initial indication of convergent and discriminant validity. CONCLUSIONS: The FRESH Foods Survey is efficient, tailored to food pantry populations, can be used to monitor dietary behaviours and may be useful to measure intervention impact.

Comprehensive Diabetes Self-Management Support From Food Banks: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether food bank provision of self-management support and diabetes-appropriate food improves glycemic control among clients with diabetes. METHODS: We screened 5329 adults for diabetes at food pantries (n = 27) affiliated with food banks in Oakland, California; Detroit, Michigan; and Houston, Texas, between October 2015 and September 2016. We individually randomized 568 participants with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 7.5% or greater to waitlist control or 6-month intervention including food, diabetes education, health care referral, and glucose monitoring. The primary outcome was HbA1c at 6 months. RESULTS: Food security (relative risk [RR] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73, 0.98), food stability (RR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.64, 0.93), and fruit and vegetable intake (risk difference [RD] = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.34, 0.34) significantly improved among intervention participants. There were no differences in self-management (depressive symptoms, diabetes distress, self-care, hypoglycemia, self-efficacy) or HbA1c (RD = 0.24; 95% CI = -0.09, 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Food banks are ideally situated to provide diabetes-appropriate food to food-insecure households. Effective strategies for food banks to support improvements in diabetes clinical outcomes require additional study. Public Health Implications. Moving chronic disease support from clinics into communities expands reach into vulnerable populations. However, it is unclear how community interventions should be integrated with clinical care to improve disease outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02569060.

Evaluating a social risk screening and referral program in an urban safety-net hospital emergency department.

Objective: The emergency department (ED) is an opportune venue to screen for unmet social needs and connect patients with social services. This quality improvement study incorporates both qualitative and quantitative data to examine unmet social needs among ED patients and program implementation. Methods: From September 2020 to December 2021, an urban safety-net hospital adult ED implemented a social needs screening and referral program. Trained emergency staff screened eligible patients for 5 social needs (housing, food, transportation, utilities, employment), giving resource guides to patients who screened positive (THRIVE+). We collected screening data from the electronic health record, conducted semi-structured interviews with THRIVE+ patients and clinical staff, and directly observed discharge interactions. Results: Emergency staff screened 58.5% of eligible patients for social risk. Of the screened patients, 27.0% reported at least 1 unmet social need. Of those, 74.8% requested assistance. Screened patients reported housing insecurity (16.3%) as the most prevalent unmet social need followed by food insecurity (13.3%) and unemployment (8.7%). Among interviewed patients, 57.1% recalled being screened, but only 24.5% recalled receiving resource guides. Patients who received guides reported little success connecting with resources and supported universal guide dissemination. Staff expressed preference for warm handoff to social services. Of 13 observed discharge interactions, clinical staff only discussed guides with 2 patients, with no positive endorsement of the guides in any observed interactions. Conclusions: An ED social needs screening program can be moderately feasible and accepted. We identified housing as the most prevalent need. Significant gaps exist between screening and referral, with few patients receiving resources. Further training and workflow optimization are underway.

Northeast Postacute Medical Facilities Disproportionately Reject Referrals For Patients With Opioid Use Disorder.

Referrals of hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) to postacute medical care facilities are commonly rejected. We linked all electronic referrals from a Boston safety-net hospital in 2018 to clinical data and used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between OUD diagnosis and rejection from postacute medical care. Hospitalized patients with OUD were referred to more facilities than patients without OUD (8.2 versus 6.6 per hospitalization), were rejected a greater proportion of the time (83.3 percent versus 65.5 percent), and in adjusted analyses had greater odds of rejection from postacute care (adjusted odds ratio, 2.2). In addition, people with OUD were referred disproportionately to a small subset of facilities with a higher likelihood of acceptance. Our findings document disparities in postacute care admissions for people with OUD. Efforts to ensure equitable access to medically necessary postacute medical care for people with OUD are needed.

Rejection of Patients With Opioid Use Disorder Referred for Post-acute Medical Care Before and After an Anti-discrimination Settlement in Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how commonly medical inpatients with opioid use disorder (OUD) referred for postacute medical care were rejected due to substance use or treatment with opioid agonist therapy (OAT). Additionally, to assess for changes in rejection rates following the United States Attorney's May 2018 settlement with a Massachusetts nursing facility for violating anti-discrimination laws for such rejections. METHODS: We linked electronic referrals to private Massachusetts postacute medical care facilities from Boston Medical Center in 2018 with clinical data. We included referrals with evidence of OUD using ICD-10 diagnosis codes or OAT receipt. We identified the frequency of referrals where the stated rejection reason was substance use or OAT and classified these as discriminatory. We used segmented regression to assess for changes in proportion of referrals with substance use and OAT-related rejections before and after the settlement. RESULTS: In 2018, 219 OUD-associated hospitalizations resulted in 1648 referrals to 285 facilities; 81.8% (1348) were rejected. Among hospitalizations, 37.4% (82) received at least 1 discriminatory rejection. Among rejections, 15.1% (203) were discriminatory (105 for OAT and 98 for substance use). Among facilities, 29.1% (83) had at least one discriminatory rejection. We found no differences in proportion of discriminatory rejections before and after the settlement. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals hospitalized with OUD frequently experience explicit discrimination when rejected from postacute care despite federal and state protections. Efforts are needed to enhance enforcement of anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and policies to ensure access to postacute medical care for people with OUD and ongoing medical needs.

Point-of-Care Hemoglobin A1C Testing System in Community Settings: Challenges, Opportunities, and Measurement Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) hemoglobin A1c (A1C) testing provides clinicians and diabetic patients real-time information on glycemic control. POC testing in community settings may expand reach, but feasibility is underexplored. We sought to describe challenges, opportunities, and quality control results of POC testing conducted in community food pantries. METHODS: Food bank staff who were directly involved in POC testing provided feedback in telephone interviews, weekly team calls, and quarterly open-ended surveys. We evaluated device performance using test-retest comparisons (n = 58) and comparisons between POC results and laboratory results from medical records (n = 72). LESSONS LEARNED: Study staff performed 1,771 POC A1c tests. Barriers were administrative, regulatory, and operational. Opportunities included ease of training and high participant satisfaction. There was high test-retest correlation (r = 0.97) and high correlation between POC results and laboratory results from medical records (r = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Community POC testing programs are feasible and relatively accurate, but implementation requires resources and capacity building. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov with identifier NCT02569060, registered October 6, 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02569060.

Diabetes-Related Health Care Utilization and Dietary Intake Among Food Pantry Clients.

Purpose: Consuming a diet appropriate for management of diabetes mellitus (DM) is challenging, particularly for adults with food insecurity (FI). DM-related health care services are thought to support better dietary intake. In this study, we explored associations between DM-related health care utilization and dietary intake among FI adults with DM. Methods: We used cross-sectional, baseline data (collected 2015-2016) from a trial designed to improve glycemic control among adult food pantry clients with DM. We examined intake of vegetables, fruit, sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), and desserts using the California Health Interview Survey dietary screener. We then examined adjusted associations between dietary intake and two components of DM-related health care utilization (<12 months vs. ≥12 months ago): self-reported visit to a health care provider for DM management and DM self-management education. Results: Among 523 participants (mean hemoglobin A1c 9.8%; body mass index 34.6 kg/m2; 17.0% uninsured), vegetable intake was more frequent in those reporting recent utilization of health care providers for DM management and DSME-related services (p<0.01), compared with those with less recent use. There was no association between intake frequency of fruit or SSBs and utilization of either DM-related service. Participants more recently utilizing DSME-related services consumed desserts more frequently (p=0.02). Relationships persisted after controlling for DM duration, race/ethnicity, education, health insurance, location, medication adherence, and depression. Conclusions: Among FI patients, DM-related services offered in clinical settings may more effectively increase vegetable consumption than decrease consumption of food and beverage items that can worsen glycemic control. Food pantry settings may provide an opportunity to reinforce dietary messaging.

A Pilot Food Bank Intervention Featuring Diabetes-Appropriate Food Improved Glycemic Control Among Clients In Three States.

Food insecurity--defined as not having adequate quantity and quality of food at all times for all household members to have an active, healthy life--is a risk factor for poor diabetes control, yet few diabetes interventions address this important factor. Food pantries, which receive food from food banks and distribute it to clients in need, may be ideal sites for diabetes self-management support because they can provide free diabetes-appropriate food to people in low-income communities. Between February 2012 and March 2014, we enrolled 687 food pantry clients with diabetes in three states in a six-month pilot intervention that provided them with diabetes-appropriate food, blood sugar monitoring, primary care referral, and self-management support. Improvements were seen in pre-post analyses of glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c decreased from 8.11 percent to 7.96 percent), fruit and vegetable intake (which increased from 2.8 to 3.1 servings per day), self-efficacy, and medication adherence. Among participants with elevated HbA1c (at least 7.5 percent) at baseline, HbA1c improved from 9.52 percent to 9.04 percent. Although food pantries are nontraditional settings for diabetes support, this pilot study suggests a promising health promotion model for vulnerable populations. Policies supporting such interventions may be particularly effective because of food pantries' food access and distribution capacity.