COVID-19 impacts and inequities among underserved communities with diabetes.

Background: People with diabetes have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. These risks are amplified for underserved communities including racial/ethnic minorities and people with lower socioeconomic status. However, limited research has examined COVID-19 outcomes specifically affecting underserved communities with diabetes. Methods: From November 2021 to July 2022, adults with insulin-requiring diabetes at federally qualified health centers in Florida and California (n = 450) completed surveys examining COVID-19 outcomes and demographics. Surveys assessed COVID-19 severity, vaccination uptake, mask-wearing habits, income changes, and healthcare access changes. Surveys also included the full Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS-19). Descriptive statistics were computed for all outcomes. Between-group comparisons for state and race/ethnicity were evaluated via Chi-Squared, Fisher's Exact, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel, One-Way ANOVA, and t-tests. Logistic regression determined factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Data were self-reported and analyzed cross-sectionally. Results: Overall, 29.7 % reported contracting COVID-19; of those, 45.3 % sought care or were hospitalized. Most (81.3 %) received ≥ 1 vaccine. Hispanics had the highest vaccination rate (91.1 %); Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) had the lowest (73.9 %; p =.0281). Hispanics had 4.63x greater vaccination odds than Non-Hispanic Whites ([NHWs]; 95 % CI = [1.81, 11.89]). NHWs least often wore masks (18.8 %; p <.001). Participants reported pandemic-related healthcare changes (62 %) and higher costs of diabetes medications (41 %). Income loss was more frequent in Florida (76 %; p <.001). NHBs most frequently reported "severe" income loss (26.4 %; p =.0124). Loss of health insurance was more common among NHBs (13.3 %; p =.0416) and in Florida (9.7 %; p =.039). COVID-19 anxiety was highest among NHBs and Hispanics (IQR = [0.0, 3.0]; p =.0232) and in Florida (IQR = [0.0, 2.0]; p =.0435). Conclusions: Underserved communities with diabetes had high COVID-19 vaccine uptake but experienced significant COVID-19-related physical, psychosocial, and financial impacts. NHBs and those in Florida had worse outcomes than other racial/ethnic groups and those in California. Further research, interventions, and policy changes are needed to promote health equity for this population.

Project ECHO Diabetes Cost Modeling to Support the Replication and Expansion of Tele-mentoring Programs in Non-research Settings.

INTRODUCTION: Project ECHO Diabetes is a tele-education learning model for primary care providers (PCPs) seeking to improve care for patients with diabetes from marginalized communities. Project ECHO Diabetes utilized expert "hub" teams comprising endocrinologists, dieticians, nurses, psychologists, and social workers and "spokes" consisting of PCPs and their patients with diabetes. This Project ECHO Diabetes model provided diabetes support coaches to provide additional support to patients. We sought to estimate the costs of operating a Project ECHO Diabetes hub, inclusive of diabetes support coach costs. METHODS: Data from Project ECHO Diabetes from June 2021 to June 2022 and wages from national databases were used to estimate hub and diabetes support coach costs to operate a 6-month, 24-session Project ECHO Diabetes program at hubs (University of Florida and Stanford University) and spokes (PCP clinic sites in Florida and California). RESULTS: Hub costs for delivering a 6-month Project ECHO Diabetes program to five spoke clinics were $96,873. Personnel costs were the principal driver. Mean cost was $19,673 per spoke clinic and $11.37 per spoke clinic patient. Diabetes support coach costs were estimated per spoke clinic and considered scalable in that they would increase proportionately with the number of spoke clinics in a Project ECHO Diabetes cohort. Mean diabetes support coach costs were $6,506 per spoke clinic and $3.72 per patient. Total program costs per hub were $129,404. Mean cost per clinic was $25,881. Mean cost per patient was $15.03. CONCLUSION: Herein, we document real-world costs to operate a Project ECHO Diabetes hub and diabetes support coaches. Future analysis of Project ECHO Diabetes will include estimates of spoke participation costs and changes in health care costs and savings. As state agencies, insurers, and philanthropies consider the replication of Project ECHO Diabetes, this analysis provides important initial information regarding primary operating costs.

Tele-education model for primary care providers to advance diabetes equity: Findings from Project ECHO Diabetes.

Introduction: In the US, many individuals with diabetes do not have consistent access to endocrinologists and therefore rely on primary care providers (PCPs) for their diabetes management. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) Diabetes, a tele-education model, was developed to empower PCPs to independently manage diabetes, including education on diabetes technology initiation and use, to bridge disparities in diabetes. Methods: PCPs (n=116) who participated in Project ECHO Diabetes and completed pre- and post-intervention surveys were included in this analysis. The survey was administered in California and Florida to participating PCPs via REDCap and paper surveys. This survey aimed to evaluate practice demographics, protocols with adult and pediatric T1D management, challenges, resources, and provider knowledge and confidence in diabetes management. Differences and statistical significance in pre- and post-intervention responses were evaluated via McNemar's tests. Results: PCPs reported improvement in all domains of diabetes education and management. From baseline, PCPs reported improvement in their confidence to serve as the T1D provider for their community (pre vs post: 43.8% vs 68.8%, p=0.005), manage insulin therapy (pre vs post: 62.8% vs 84.3%, p=0.002), and identify symptoms of diabetes distress (pre vs post: 62.8% vs 84.3%, p=0.002) post-intervention. Compared to pre-intervention, providers reported significant improvement in their confidence in all aspects of diabetes technology including prescribing technology (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001), managing insulin pumps (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001) and hybrid closed loop (10.2% vs 26.5%, p=0.033), and interpreting sensor data (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001) post-intervention. Discussion: PCPs who participated in Project ECHO Diabetes reported increased confidence in diabetes management, with notable improvement in their ability to prescribe, manage, and troubleshoot diabetes technology. These data support the use of tele-education of PCPs to increase confidence in diabetes technology management as a feasible strategy to advance equity in diabetes management and outcomes.

Barriers to retinopathy screening in youth and young adults with type 1 diabetes.

Early detection of diabetic retinopathy (DR) is imperative; however, adherence to screening guidelines is poor. We hypothesized that youth and young adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who met American Diabetes Association criteria for recommended DR screening at the time of the study (10 years old or greater with diabetes duration of 5 years or more) would report multiple barriers to screening and that targeted barriers and subpopulations could be identified to improve access to care. 271 youth aged 10 to 26 years with T1D of at least 5 years duration were recruited from clinic, diabetes camp, and a diabetes conference and completed a patient-reported questionnaire. 113 (41.7%) reported at least one barrier to DR screening, with missed school and work being the most common (20.7%). Older participants (P = 0.007) and those with a longer diabetes duration (P = 0.018) were more likely to report barriers to screening. Recruitment location, sex, race and ethnicity, HbA1c, insulin regimen, and clinic visit frequency were not associated with reporting at least one barrier. Slightly less than two-thirds (62.1%) of participants who responded (n = 235 out of 271) adhered to recommended screening guidelines of the time and reported having an eye exam within the past year, 24.7% 12-23 months ago, 9.8% 2 years ago or more, and 3.4% had never had a DR exam. As older patients and those with longer duration of diabetes are more likely to have DR, targeted interventions to address barriers to care, such as, missed school and work should be implemented in these groups.

Use of Ecological Momentary Assessment to Measure Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Adherence in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Daily self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is essential for type 1 diabetes management yet is challenging during adolescence. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is the repeated sampling of behaviors and experiences in real time in the natural environment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 1) the validity of self-reported SMBG values via text message-delivered EMA surveys compared with objective SMBG values via glucose meters and 2) in-the-moment motivators and barriers to performing SMBG in a pediatric type 1 diabetes population. METHODS: Youth (n = 62, aged 11-21 years) with type 1 diabetes received three text messages daily for 10 days containing surveys inquiring about SMBG engagement. Objective SMBG values were downloaded from glucose meters. RESULTS: On average, participants reported performing SMBG 4 times/day. Of the self-reported SMBG values, 39.6% were accurate. Inaccurate values included additions (i.e., self-reported value with no objective value), omissions (i.e., objective value with no self-reported value), and alterations (difference between self-report and objective SMBG values ≥10 mg/dL). Of the matched pairs of self-reported and objective SMBG values, 41.3% were altered. Bland-Altman plots determined that the mean difference between self-reported and objective glucose data were -5.43 mg/dL. Participants reported being motivated to check their blood glucose because it was important for their health, and reported barriers included wanting to ignore the task, forgetting, and not having devices. CONCLUSION: Youth's self-reported SMBG values may not align with objective readings. The results of this study can facilitate future research to determine individual factors related to SMBG and accuracy of self-reporting.