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.

Using Peer Power to Reduce Health Disparities: Implementation of a Diabetes Support Coach Program in Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Community health workers (CHWs) provide vital support to underserved communities in the promotion of health equity by addressing barriers related to the social determinants of health that often prevent people living with diabetes from achieving optimal health outcomes. Peer support programs in diabetes can also offer people living with diabetes invaluable support through a shared understanding of the disease and by offsetting diabetes-related stigma. As part of a Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Diabetes program, participating federally qualified healthcare centers were provided diabetes support coaches (DSCs) to facilitate patient engagement. DSCs hold invaluable expert knowledge, as they live with diabetes themselves and reside in areas they serve, thus combining the CHW role with peer support models. The use of DSCs and CHWs during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and beyond is highly effective at reaching underserved communities with diabetes and promoting health equity.

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.

The Neighborhood Deprivation Index and Provider Geocoding Identify Critical Catchment Areas for Diabetes Outreach.

PURPOSE: In designing a Project ECHO™ type 1 diabetes (T1D) program in Florida and California, the Neighborhood Deprivation Index (NDI) was used in conjunction with geocoding of primary care providers (PCPs) and endocrinologists in each state to concurrently identify areas with low endocrinology provider density and high health risk/poverty areas. The NDI measures many aspects of poverty proven to be critical indicators of health outcomes. METHODS: The data from the 2013-2017 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates were used to create NDI maps for California and Florida. In addition, geocoding and 30-minute drive-time buffers were performed using publicly available provider directories for PCPs and endocrinologists in both states by Google Geocoding API and the TravelTime Search Application Programming Interface (API). RESULTS: Based on these findings, we defined high-need catchment areas as areas with (1) more than a 30-minute drive to the nearest endocrinologist but within a 30-minute drive to the nearest PCP; (2) an NDI in the highest quartile; and (3) a population above the median (5199 for census tracts, and 1394 for census block groups). Out of the 12 181 census tracts and 34 490 census block groups in California and Florida, we identified 57 tracts and 215 block groups meeting these criteria as high-need catchment areas. CONCLUSION: Geospatial analysis provides an important initial methodologic step to effectively focus outreach efforts in diabetes program development. The integration of the NDI with geocoded provider directories enables more cost-effective and targeted interventions to reach the most vulnerable populations living with T1D.

Addressing health disparities in type 1 diabetes through peer mentorship.

Pronounced health disparities exist in type 1 diabetes (T1D) based on socioeconomic status (SES) yet there are a lack of programs designed to promote health equity for vulnerable communities. The All for ONE (Outreach, Networks, and Education) mentoring program was piloted pairing college students and publicly insured teenagers with T1D to assess feasibility as a possible intervention. There were 22 mentors recruited (mean age 20 ± 2 years; 17 [77%] females; mean HbA1c 8.4 ± 1.5%) and matched with mentees based on gender. There were 42 teens randomized to treatment and control groups including 22 teens in the treatment group (age 14 ± 2 years; 17 [77%] females; HbA1c 9.8 ± 2.3%) and 20 teens in the control group (age 14 ± 2 years; 15 [75%] females; HbA1c 8.9 ± 2.0%) followed over 9 months. Outcome measures included HbA1c and the Children's Hope Scale. The intervention included automated text reminders for blood glucose monitoring, text exchanges, social events with education, and clinic visits with mentors/mentees. Mean change in HbA1c for teens was +0.09% in the intervention group, compared with +0.28% in the control group (P = .61); college students had a reduction in HbA1c of -0.22% (P = .38). Treatment group teens had marked improvement in their hope for the future compared to control group teens (P = .04) and were more likely to attend clinic visits (P = .02). This program established feasibility for a model that could be replicated and modified for other types of settings. Additional research is warranted to study the potential long-term benefits of participating in the All for ONE mentoring program.

Erratum: Disparities in Social Support for Youths With Type 1 Diabetes. Clinical Diabetes 2015;33:62-69.

[This corrects the article on p. 62 in vol. 33, PMID: 25897185.].

Disparities in social support systems for youths with type 1 diabetes.

IN BRIEF Low socioeconomic status (SES) is consistently identified as a major risk factor for poor health outcomes in youths with type 1 diabetes, yet little is known about the social factors that yield such disparities. This study used survey research to examine the role of SES by focusing on differential resourcing in social support systems for youths with type 1 diabetes and their parents/caregivers. We identified significant inequalities in social support systems and found that parents from lower-income households engage in few coping activities and rarely identify a primary care provider as the main point of contact when facing a diabetes-related problem. Our findings underscore the need to better connect low SES families to diabetes-specific professional resourcing and to raise awareness about the importance of extracurricular activities as a form of social support for youths.