Primary Occurrence of Cardiovascular Events After Adding Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors or Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Compared With Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors: A Cohort Study in Veterans With Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in preventing major adverse cardiac events (MACE) is uncertain for those without preexisting cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that MACE incidence was lower with the addition of GLP1RA or SGLT2i compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) for primary cardiovascular prevention. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of U.S. veterans from 2001 to 2019. SETTING: Veterans aged 18 years or older receiving care from the Veterans Health Administration, with data linkage to Medicare, Medicaid, and the National Death Index. PATIENTS: Veterans adding GLP1RA, SGLT2i, or DPP4i onto metformin, sulfonylurea, or insulin treatment alone or in combination. Episodes were stratified by history of cardiovascular disease. MEASUREMENTS: Study outcomes were MACE (acute myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death) and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Cox models compared the outcome between medication groups using pairwise comparisons in a weighted cohort adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: The cohort included 28 759 GLP1RA versus 28 628 DPP4i weighted pairs and 21 200 SGLT2i versus 21 170 DPP4i weighted pairs. Median age was 67 years, and diabetes duration was 8.5 years. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists were associated with lower MACE and HF versus DPP4i (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94]), yielding an adjusted risk difference (aRD) of 3.2 events (CI, 1.1 to 5.0) per 1000 person-years. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors were not associated with MACE and HF (aHR, 0.91 [CI, 0.78 to 1.08]; aRD, 1.28 [-1.12 to 3.32]) compared with DPP4i. LIMITATION: Residual confounding; use of DPP4i, GLP1RA, and SGLT2i as first-line therapies were not examined. CONCLUSION: The addition of GLP1RA was associated with primary reductions of MACE and HF hospitalization compared with DPP4i use; SGLT2i addition was not associated with primary MACE prevention. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: VA Clinical Science Research and Development and supported in part by the Centers for Diabetes Translation Research.

The My Diabetes Care Patient Portal Intervention: Usability and Pre-Post Assessment.

BACKGROUND: My Diabetes Care (MDC) is a novel, multifaceted patient portal intervention designed to help patients better understand their diabetes health data and support self-management. MDC uses infographics to visualize and summarize patients' diabetes health data, incorporates motivational strategies, and provides literacy level-appropriate educational resources. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the usability, acceptability, perceptions, and potential impact of MDC. METHODS: We recruited 69 participants from four clinics affiliated with Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Participants were given 1 month of access to MDC and completed pre- and post-questionnaires including validated measures of usability and patient activation, and questions about user experience. RESULTS: Sixty participants completed the study. Participants' mean age was 58, 55% were females, 68% were Caucasians, and 48% had limited health literacy (HL). Most participants (80%) visited MDC three or more times and 50% spent a total of ≥15 minutes on MDC. Participants' median System Usability Scale (SUS) score was 78.8 [Q1, Q3: 72.5, 87.5] and significantly greater than the threshold value of 68 indicative of "above average" usability (p < 0.001). The median SUS score of patients with limited HL was similar to those with adequate HL (77.5 [72.5, 85.0] vs. 82.5 [72.5, 92.5]; p = 0.41). Participants most commonly reported the literacy level-appropriate educational links and health data infographics as features that helped them better understand their diabetes health data (65%). All participants (100%) intended to continue to use MDC. Median Patient Activation Measure® scores increased postintervention (64.3 [55.6, 72.5] vs. 67.8 [60.6, 75.0]; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Participants, including those with limited HL, rated the usability of MDC above average, anticipated continued use, and identified key features that improved their understanding of diabetes health data. Patient activation improved over the study period. Our findings suggest MDC may be a beneficial addition to existing patient portals.

Prevalence of Self-Reported Diabetes by Sexual Orientation: Results from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the prevalence of self-reported diabetes and diabetes risk factors among adult sexual minority and heterosexual populations in the United States. METHODS: Data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for 3776 lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults and 142,852 heterosexual adults aged 18 years and older were used to estimate the prevalence of diabetes. Binomial logistic regression models were used to compare the odds of diabetes by sexual orientation. RESULTS: Sexual minorities were younger and more racially diverse than heterosexuals. Gay men less often and lesbian and bisexual women more often reported a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher than heterosexuals. Overall, 14.2% of bisexual men, 11.4% of gay men, and 10.8% of heterosexual men reported a lifetime diabetes diagnosis, as did 8.5% of lesbian women, 5.7% of bisexual women, and 10.2% of heterosexual women. After controlling for multiple factors, gay (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50; confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.09-2.07) and bisexual men [OR = 1.55; 95% CI = 1.00-2.07] were more likely to report a lifetime diabetes diagnosis than heterosexual men. Similar differences were not found for lesbian [OR = 1.22; 95% CI = 0.76-1.95] or bisexual women [OR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.62-1.26]. CONCLUSION: Sexual minorities may be at increased risk for diabetes than their heterosexual peers. This may be due partly to the chronic stressors associated with being a member of a marginalized population. Future research should explore the underlying causes and consequences of LGB diabetes disparities and elucidate best practices to improve diabetes screening and care for these vulnerable patient populations.

Health literacy explains racial disparities in diabetes medication adherence.

Although low health literacy and suboptimal medication adherence are more prevalent in racial/ethnic minority groups than Whites, little is known about the relationship between these factors in adults with diabetes, and whether health literacy or numeracy might explain racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes medication adherence. Previous work in HIV suggests health literacy mediates racial differences in adherence to antiretroviral treatment, but no study to date has explored numeracy as a mediator of the relationship between race/ethnicity and medication adherence. This study tested whether health literacy and/or numeracy were related to diabetes medication adherence, and whether either factor explained racial differences in adherence. Using path analytic models, we explored the predicted pathways between racial status, health literacy, diabetes-related numeracy, general numeracy, and adherence to diabetes medications. After adjustment for covariates, African American race was associated with poor medication adherence (r = -0.10, p < .05). Health literacy was associated with adherence (r = .12, p < .02), but diabetes-related numeracy and general numeracy were not related to adherence. Furthermore, health literacy reduced the effect of race on adherence to nonsignificance, such that African American race was no longer directly associated with lower medication adherence (r = -0.09, p = .14). Diabetes medication adherence promotion interventions should address patient health literacy limitations.

Addressing literacy and numeracy to improve diabetes care: two randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic patients with lower literacy or numeracy skills are at greater risk for poor diabetes outcomes. This study evaluated the impact of providing literacy- and numeracy-sensitive diabetes care within an enhanced diabetes care program on A1C and other diabetes outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In two randomized controlled trials, we enrolled 198 adult diabetic patients with most recent A1C >or=7.0%, referred for participation in an enhanced diabetes care program. For 3 months, control patients received care from existing enhanced diabetes care programs, whereas intervention patients received enhanced programs that also addressed literacy and numeracy at each institution. Intervention providers received health communication training and used the interactive Diabetes Literacy and Numeracy Education Toolkit with patients. A1C was measured at 3 and 6 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes included self-efficacy, self-management behaviors, and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: At 3 months, both intervention and control patients had significant improvements in A1C from baseline (intervention -1.50 [95% CI -1.80 to -1.02]; control -0.80 [-1.10 to -0.30]). In adjusted analysis, there was greater improvement in A1C in the intervention group than in the control group (P = 0.03). At 6 months, there were no differences in A1C between intervention and control groups. Self-efficacy improved from baseline for both groups. No significant differences were found for self-management behaviors or satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: A literacy- and numeracy-focused diabetes care program modestly improved self-efficacy and glycemic control compared with standard enhanced diabetes care, but the difference attenuated after conclusion of the intervention.

Self-management behaviors, racial disparities, and glycemic control among adolescents with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes is a growing problem among adolescents, but little is known about self-management behaviors in this population. Our aim was to examine self-management behaviors and glycemic control among adolescents with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: From 2003 to 2005, a telephone survey of adolescents with type 2 diabetes was performed. Chart review obtained most recent glycated hemoglobin and clinical characteristics. Analyses compared patient characteristics and self-management behaviors to recent glycated hemoglobin levels. RESULTS: Of 139 patients contacted, 103 (74%) completed the study. The mean age was 15.4 years: 69% were girls, 47% were white, and 46% were black. Mean glycated hemoglobin was 7.7%, and the average duration of diabetes was 2.0 years. More than 80% of patients reported > or = 75% medication compliance, and 59% monitored blood glucose > 2 times daily. However, patients reported frequent episodes of overeating, drinking sugary drinks, and eating fast food. More than 70% of patients reported exercising > or = 2 times a week, but 68% reported watching > or = 2 hours of television daily. Nonwhite patients had higher glycated hemoglobin and hospitalizations per year compared with white patients. In multivariable analyses, nonwhite race remained significantly associated with higher glycated hemoglobin even after adjusting for age, gender, BMI, insurance status, and other factors. Nonwhite patients were more likely to watch > or = 2 hours of television per day (78% vs 56%), to report exercising < or = 1 time per week (35% vs 21%), and to drink > or = 1 sugary drink daily (27% vs 13%). CONCLUSION: Although patients reported good medication and monitoring adherence, they also reported poor diet and exercise habits and multiple barriers. Nonwhite race was significantly associated with poorer glycemic control even after adjusting for covariates. This may, in part, be related to disparities in lifestyle behaviors. Additional studies are indicated to further assess self-management behaviors and potential racial disparities in adolescents with type 2 diabetes.