Implementation of a Prediabetes Risk Test for an Underserved Population in a Federally Qualified Health Center.

Consistent screening for prediabetes is imperative to ensure early detection and timely intervention to prevent progression to diabetes. Adopting a standardized approach such as a screening tool can streamline the screening process. This articles describes a quality improvement project conducted at a federally qualified health center to assess whether implementation of the Prediabetes Risk Test improved early detection of prediabetes in an underserved population. Use of the risk test was found to improve detection of prediabetes in this population.

Implementation of A1C Point-of-Care Testing: Serving Under-Resourced Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in a Public Health Department.

IN BRIEF A1C point-of-care testing (POCT) paired with face-to-face education potentially improves glycemic control in under-resourced populations. In this study, A1C POCT was implemented with same-day face-to-face medication management and education for adults with type 2 diabetes in a public health department in southeastern North Carolina. The combination of POCT, medication management, and education provided together improved glycemic control and decreased clinical inertia in a setting in which access to health care is limited.

Effect of Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Treatment According to Baseline Prediabetes Status: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the effects of intensive (<120 mmHg) compared with standard (<140 mmHg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment are different among those with prediabetes versus those with fasting normoglycemia at baseline in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of SPRINT. SPRINT participants were categorized by prediabetes status, defined as baseline fasting serum glucose ≥100 mg/dL versus those with normoglycemia (fasting serum glucose <100 mg/dL). The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in myocardial infarction, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for study outcomes with intensive compared with standard SBP treatment among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia. RESULTS: Among 9,361 participants randomized (age 67.9 ± 9.4 years; 35.5% female), 3,898 and 5,425 had baseline prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively. After a median follow-up of 3.26 years, the hazard ratio for the primary outcome was 0.69 (95% CI 0.53, 0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.66, 1.03) among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively (P value for interaction 0.30). For all-cause mortality, the hazard ratio with intensive SBP treatment was 0.77 (95% CI 0.55, 1.06) for prediabetes and 0.71 (95% CI 0.54, 0.94) for normoglycemia (P value for interaction 0.74). Effects of intensive versus standard SBP treatment on prespecified renal outcomes and serious adverse events were similar for prediabetes and normoglycemia (all interaction P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In SPRINT, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those with prediabetes and fasting normoglycemia.