Protocol for a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of Mental Contrasting with Implementation Intentions (MCII) to enhance the effectiveness of VA's MOVE! weight management program: WOOP (Wish, Outcome, Obstacle, Plan) VA.

INTRODUCTION: Intensive weight management programs are effective but often have low enrollment and high attrition. Lack of motivation is a key psychological barrier to enrollment, engagement, and weight loss. Mental Contrasting with Implementation Intentions (MCII) is a unique imagery technique that increases motivation for behavior change. We describe our study protocol to assess the efficacy and implementation of MCII to enhance the effectiveness of VA's MOVE! or TeleMOVE! weight management programs using a procedure called "WOOP" (Wish, Outcome, Obstacle, Plan) for Veterans. We hypothesize that WOOP+MOVE! or TeleMOVE! (intervention) will lead to greater MOVE!/TeleMOVE! program engagment and consequently weight loss than MOVE!/TeleMOVE! alone (control). METHOD: Veterans are randomized to either the intervention or control. Both arms receive the either MOVE! or TeleMOVE! weight management programs. The intervention group receives an hour long WOOP training while the control group receives patient education. Both groups receive telephone follow up calls at 3 days, 4 weeks, and 2 months post-baseline. Eligible participants are Veterans (ages 18-70 years) with either obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) or overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) and an obesity-associated co-morbidity. At baseline, 6 and 12 months, we assess weight, diet, physical activity in both groups. The primary outcome is mean percent weight change at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include changes in waist circumference, diet, physical activity, and dieting self-efficacy and engagement in regular physical activity. We assess implementation using the RE-AIM framework. CONCLUSION: If WOOP VA is found to be efficacious, it will be an important tool to facilitate weight management and improve weight outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05014984.

Multilevel perceptions of the virtual delivery of the University of California Diabetes Prevention Program on RE-AIM domains due to COVID-19 mandates.

Background: The University of California's Diabetes Prevention Program (UC DPP) Initiative was implemented across all 10 UC campuses in 2018. The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying mandates required swift changes to program delivery, including pivoting from in-person to virtual delivery (i.e., Zoom). Our goal was to assess multilevel constituent perceptions of the use of a virtual platform to deliver UC DPP due to COVID-19 mandates. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with 68 UC DPP participants, coordinators, and leaders to examine the use of virtual platform delivery on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) of UC DPP. Transcripts were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis and emergent themes were categorized using domains corresponding to RE-AIM framework. Results: Among UC DPP participants (n = 42), virtual delivery primarily impacted perceptions of UC DPP effectiveness and implementation. Some participants perceived program effectiveness to be negatively impacted, given their preference for in-person sessions, which they felt provided more engagement, peer support, and accountability. Implementation challenges included problems with virtual format (e.g., "Zoom fatigue"); however, several benefits were also noted (e.g., increased flexibility, maintenance of DPP connections during campus closures). UC DPP coordinators (n = 18) perceived virtual delivery as positively impacting UC DPP reach, since virtual platforms provided access for some who could not participate in-person, and negatively impacting effectiveness due to reduced engagement and lower peer support. UC leaders (n = 8) perceived that use of the virtual format had a positive impact on reach (e.g., increased availability, accessibility) and negatively impacted effectiveness (e.g., less intensive interactions on a virtual platform). Across constituent levels, the use of a virtual platform had little to no impact on perceptions of adoption and maintenance of UC DPP. Conclusion: Perceptions of the reach, effectiveness, and implementation of UC DPP using a virtual platform varied across constituents, although all groups noted a potential negative impact on overall program effectiveness. Unanticipated program adaptations, including virtual delivery, present potential benefits as well as perceived drawbacks, primarily across the effectiveness domain. Understanding differential constituent perceptions of the impact of virtual delivery can help maximize RE-AIM and inform future UC DPP delivery strategies.

Twelve-Month Reach and Effectiveness of a University-Based Diabetes Prevention Initiative.

INTRODUCTION: The University of California (UC) implemented the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) to address diabetes and obesity risk. This project examined the reach and effectiveness of this university-based DPP delivery approach. METHODS: This project compared 12-month weight change among three groups of UC beneficiaries with overweight/obesity: (1) those who received invitation letters and enrolled in UC DPP, (2) those mailed invitation letters but did not enroll, and (3) those who were not mailed letters and did not enroll (controls). Using 2012-2022 EHR, administrative and DPP cohort data, an interrupted time series was conducted in 2022-2023 to compare group differences in rate of weight change. RESULTS: Among 6,231 beneficiaries (132 UC DPP aware enrollees, 1,750 DPP aware non-enrollees, 4,349 controls), UC DPP enrollees were older (mean age 49), mostly women (76%), and more diverse (33% Asian, 8% Black, 20% Hispanic, 4% Multi/Other). Over 12 months of follow-up, UC DPP enrollee postenrollment rate of weight loss was -0.68 lbs./month. UC DPP enrollees had significantly greater weight change from pre- to post-enrollment than DPP aware non-enrollees (adjusted Δ-1.02 vs. Δ-0.07 lbs./month, difference= -0.95, p<0.001). Weight change among all participants who received letters with/without DPP enrollment was similar to controls. CONCLUSIONS: UC DPP reached a diverse group and was effective for weight loss at 12-month follow-up. However, UC DPP invitation letters to raise prediabetes and DPP awareness were not associated with significant weight change in the absence of DPP enrollment. University-based approaches to DPP delivery are effective and may enhance reach of DPP among at-risk adults.

The Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making for Diabetes Prevention: 24- and 36-Month Results From the Prediabetes Informed Decision and Education (PRIDE) Trial.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a cluster-randomized, shared decision-making (SDM) trial offering lifestyle change, metformin, or both options, to adults at risk for diabetes in a primary care network (n = 20 practices). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used propensity score matching to identify control patients and used electronic health record data to compare weight loss at 24 and 36 months of follow-up and diabetes incidence at 36 months of follow-up. RESULTS: In adjusted post hoc analyses, SDM participants (n = 489) maintained modestly greater 24-month weight loss of -3.1 lb and 36-month weight loss of -2.7 lb versus controls (n = 1,430, both comparisons P < 0.001). SDM participants who chose both lifestyle change and metformin sustained weight loss at 36 months of -4.1 lb (P < 0.001 vs. controls). We found no differences in incident diabetes (15% of SDM participants, 14% of control participants; P = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to demonstrate weight loss maintenance up to 36 months after diabetes prevention SDM.

Differential Impact of a Plan-Led Standardized Complex Care Management Intervention on Subgroups of High-Cost High-Need Medicaid Patients.

Interventions to better coordinate care for high-need high-cost (HNHC) Medicaid patients frequently fail to demonstrate changes in hospitalizations or emergency department (ED) use. Many of these interventions are modeled after practice-level complex care management (CCM) programs. The authors hypothesized that a national CCM program may be effective for some subgroups of HNHC patients, and the overall null effect may obfuscate subgroup-level impact. They used a previously published typology defining 6 subgroups of high-cost Medicaid patients and evaluated program impact by subgroup. The analysis used an individual-level interrupted time series with a comparison group. Intervention subjects were high-cost adult Medicaid patients who enrolled in 1 of 2 national CCM programs implemented by UnitedHealthcare (UHC) (n = 39,687). The comparators were patients who met CCM program criteria but were ineligible due to current enrollment in another UHC/Optum led program (N = 26,359). The intervention was a CCM program developed by UHC/Optum to provide "whole person care" delivering standardized interventions to address medical, behavioral, and social needs for HNHC Medicaid patients, and the outcome was probability of hospitalization or ED use in a given month, estimated at 12 months postenrollment. A reduction in risk of ED utilization for 4 of 6 subgroups was found. A reduction in risk of hospitalization for 1 of 6 subgroups was also found. The authors conclude that standardized health plan led CCM programs demonstrate effectiveness for certain subgroups of HNHC patients in Medicaid. This effectiveness is principally in reducing ED risk and may extend to the risk of hospitalization for a small number of patients.

Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER) 2.0 QUERI: study protocol for a cluster-randomized hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Women Veterans are the fastest-growing segment of Veterans Health Administration (VA) users. The VA has invested heavily in delivering care for women Veterans that is effective, comprehensive, and gender-tailored. However, gender disparities persist in cardiovascular (CV) and diabetes risk factor control, and the rate of perinatal depression among women Veterans is higher than that among civilian women. Challenges such as distance, rurality, negative perception of VA, discrimination (e.g., toward sexual and/or gender minority individuals), and harassment on VA grounds can further impede women's regular use of VA care. Enhancing Mental and Physical Health of Women through Engagement and Retention (EMPOWER) 2.0 builds on work to date by expanding access to evidence-based, telehealth preventive and mental health services for women Veterans with high-priority health conditions in rural and urban-isolation areas. METHODS: EMPOWER 2.0 will evaluate two implementation strategies, Replicating Effective Practices (REP) and Evidence-Based Quality Improvement (EBQI), in supporting the implementation and sustainment of three evidence-based interventions (Virtual Diabetes Prevention Program; Telephone Lifestyle Coaching Program; and Reach Out, Stay Strong Essentials) focused on preventive and mental health care for women Veterans. We will conduct a mixed-methods implementation evaluation using a cluster-randomized hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial design to compare the effectiveness of REP and EBQI on improved access to and rates of engagement in telehealth preventive lifestyle and mental health services. Other outcomes of interest include (a) VA performance metrics for telehealth care delivery and related clinical outcomes; (b) progression along the Stages of Implementation Completion; (c) adaptation, sensemaking, and experiences of implementation among multilevel stakeholders; and (d) cost and return on investment. We will also generate implementation playbooks for program partners to support scale-up and spread of these and future evidence-based women's health programs and policies. DISCUSSION: EMPOWER 2.0 provides a model for mixed-methods hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial design incorporating evaluation of performance metrics, implementation progress, stakeholder experience, and cost and return on investment, with the ultimate goal of improving access to evidence-based preventive and mental telehealth services for women Veterans with high-priority health conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05050266 . Registered on 20 September 2021.

Cognitive screening among older adults with diabetes across diverse clinic settings.

AIMS: Diabetes increases risk of cognitive dysfunction and dementia, which can make it harder to manage diabetes. We aimed to examine cognitive screening for older adults with diabetes in 1) endocrine (Endo), 2) geriatric (Geri) and 3) multidisciplinary endocrine-geriatric (Geri-Endo), to study differences between these settings and to elucidate risk factors of cognitive dysfunction. METHODS: We performed cognitive screening for subsets of patients ≥ age 65 with diabetes in one large healthcare system. We compared results and differences from the three clinic types and used adjusted multivariate logistic regression models to predict risk of cognitive dysfunction. RESULTS: Among 198 patients screened, those in Geri-Endo (N = 86) and Geri (N = 32) were more likely to have lower Mini-Cog scores, higher prevalence of hypertension and cardiovascular (CV) events. Endo and Geri-Endo patients had longer durations of diabetes, higher incidence of hypoglycemia, and were more likely to use insulin. Age > 75 years (p = 0.0105), previous CV events (p = 0.0006) and body mass index < 30 (p = 0.0115) were significantly associated with lower Mini-Cog scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that cognitive screening can help identify at risk older adults with diabetes. Thus, yearly screening should be part of routine diabetes care.

The Diabetes Health Plan and Healthcare Utilization Among Beneficiaries with Low Incomes.

BACKGROUND: The socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in hospital and emergency room utilization among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is partially driven by cost-related non-adherence. OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of the Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a diabetes-specific health plan incorporating value-based insurance design principles on healthcare utilization among low-income adults with T2DM. DESIGN: To examine the impact of the DHP on healthcare utilization, we employed a difference-in-differences (DID) study design with a propensity-matched comparison group. We modeled count and dichotomous outcomes using Poisson and logit models, respectively. PARTICIPANTS: Cohort of adults (18-64) with T2DM, with an annual household income <$ 30,000, and who were continuously enrolled in an employer-sponsored UnitedHealthcare plan for at least 2 years between 2009 and 2014. INTERVENTIONS: The DHP reduces or eliminates out-of-pocket costs for disease management visits, diabetes-related medicines, and diabetes self-monitoring supplies. The DHP also provides access to diabetes-specific telephone case management as well as other online resources. MAIN MEASURES: Number of disease management visits (N = 1732), any emergency room utilization (N = 1758), and any hospitalization (N = 1733), within the year. KEY RESULTS: DID models predicting disease management visits suggested that DHP-exposed beneficiaries had 1.7 fewer in-person disease management visits per year (- 1.70 [95% CI: - 2.19, - 1.20], p < 0.001), on average, than comparison beneficiaries. Models for emergency room (0.00 [95% CI: - 0.06, 0.06], p = 0.966) and hospital utilization (- 0.03 [95% CI: - 0.08, - 0.01], p = 0.164) did not demonstrate statistically significant changes associated with DHP exposure. CONCLUSIONS: While no relationship between DHP exposure and high-cost utilization was observed in the short term, fewer in-person disease management visits were observed. Future studies are needed to determine the clinical implications of these findings.

Two decades of diabetes prevention efforts: A call to innovate and revitalize our approach to lifestyle change.

The impact of global diabetes prevention efforts has been modest despite the promise of landmark diabetes prevention trials nearly twenty years ago. While national and regional initiatives show potential, challenges remain to adapt large-scale strategies in the real-world that fits individuals and their communities. Additionally, the sedentary lifestyle changes during the COVID-19 pandemic and guidelines that now call for earlier screening (e.g., US Preventative Task Force) will increase the pool of eligible adults worldwide. Thus, a more adaptable, person-centered approach that expands the current toolkit is urgently needed to innovate and revitalize our approach to diabetes prevention. This review identifies key priorities to optimize the population-level delivery of diabetes prevention based on a consensus-based evaluation of the current evidence among experts in global translational programs; key priorities identified include (1) participant eligibility, (2) intervention intensity, (3) delivery components, (4) behavioral economics, (5) technology, and (6) the role of pharmacotherapy. We offer a conceptual framework for a broader, person-centered approach to better address an individual's risk, readiness, barriers, and digital competency.

A randomized controlled trial of a shared decision making intervention for diabetes prevention for women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus: The Gestational diabetes Risk Attenuation for New Diabetes (GRAND study).

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes. Metformin and lifestyle change through a Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) are equally effective in preventing diabetes in patients with a GDM history, so women can choose a strategy based on their preferences. This study aims to test whether shared decision making (SDM) can help women with a history of GDM increase adoption of evidence-based strategies and lose weight to lower their risk of incident diabetes in real-world settings. METHODS: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) will test the effectiveness of SDM for diabetes prevention among 310 overweight/obese women with a history of GDM and prediabetes from two large health care systems (n = 155 from UCLA Health and n = 155 from Intermountain Healthcare). The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who lose ≥5% body weight at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include uptake of DPP and/or metformin and other patient-reported outcomes such as patient activation and health-related quality of life. Rates of GDM in a subsequent pregnancy will be an exploratory outcome. A descriptive analysis of costs related to SDM implementation will also be conducted. CONCLUSION: This is the first RCT to examine the effectiveness of SDM on weight loss, lifestyle change and/or metformin use, and other patient-reported outcomes in participants with a GDM history at risk of developing diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03766256. Registered on 6 December 2018.

Association of Type 2 Diabetes Risk Perception With Interest in Diabetes Prevention Strategies Among Women With a History of Gestational Diabetes.

Objectives: The aims of this study were to identify predictors of perception of type 2 diabetes risk in women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to determine factors associated with interest in evidence-based strategies for type 2 diabetes prevention. Research Design and Methods: We surveyed women with a history of GDM who had not progressed to type 2 diabetes from a large academic medical center. We used multivariate logistic regression to assess predictors of high levels of perception of type 2 diabetes risk. We also tested associations between risk perception and interest in a lifestyle change program and/or metformin therapy. Results: In our diverse sample of 264 women, 28% were unaware that GDM is a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes after pregnancy, and 48% believed their personal risk of type 2 diabetes was low. In multivariate analyses, family history of diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.4) and knowledge of GDM as a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes (OR 4.5, 95% CI 2.1-9.8) were significant predictors of greater perception of type 2 diabetes risk. Women with higher risk perception were more likely to express interest in a lifestyle change program compared with women with lower risk perception (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.5). Conclusion: Although some women are aware that GDM is a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes, many still perceive their own risk of developing type 2 diabetes as low. Higher risk perception predicted interest in an evidence-based diabetes prevention program, highlighting the importance of personalized risk assessment and communication about risk for women who have had GDM.

Does the diabetes health plan have a differential impact on medication adherence among beneficiaries with fewer financial resources?

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a value-based insurance plan that reduces cost sharing, was previously shown to modestly increase employer-level medication adherence. It is unclear how the DHP might impact individuals with different incomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the DHP on individual-level medication adherence, by income level. METHODS: This is a retrospective, quasiexperimental study. An employer-level propensity score match was done to identify suitable control employers, followed by individual-level propensity score weighing. These weights were applied to difference-in-difference models examining the effect of the DHP and the effect of income on changes in adherence to metformin, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzymes/angiotensin receptor blockers. The weights were then applied to a differences-in-differences-in-differences model to estimate the differential impact of DHP status on changes in adherence by income group. RESULTS: The study population included 2,065 beneficiaries with DHP and 17,704 matched controls. There were no significant differences in changes to adherence for any medications between beneficiaries enrolled in the DHP vs standard plans. However, adherence to all medications was higher among those with incomes greater than $75,000 (year 1: metformin: +7.3 percentage points; statin +4.3 percentage points; angiotensin-converting enzymes/angiotensin receptor blockers: +6.2 percentage points; P < 0.01) compared with those with incomes less than $50,000. The differences-in-differences-in-differences term examining the impact of income on the DHP effect was not significant for any comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find significant associations between the DHP and changes in individual-level medication adherence, even for low-income beneficiaries. New strategies to improve consumer engagement may be needed to translate value-based insurance designs into changes in patient behavior. DISCLOSURES: Drs Ettner and Moin received grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Principal Investigator: Carol Mangione). Mr Luchs received support for attending meetings and/or travel (minimal-mileage and hotel on 2 occasions). Mr Chan has an employee benefit to purchase stock for UnitedHealth Group.

Metformin Prescription Rates for Patients with Prediabetes.

PURPOSE: Prediabetes is a serious public health concern, with 34.5% of US adults meeting the criteria for prediabetes. The American Diabetes Association has highlighted metformin therapy as a consideration for individuals with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2, those aged < 60 years, and women with a history of gestational diabetes. We examined metformin prescription rates among a national sample of commercially insured, higher risk patients with prediabetes. METHODS: We gathered 2012 to 2018 demographic, laboratory, and prescription data for 53,551 patients with prediabetes from the IBM MarketScan research database. Our primary outcome was metformin prescription rates 1 or 3 years after a laboratory confirmation of prediabetes among patients who have a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 or are aged < 60 years. RESULTS: Overall, 2.4% (n = 1,124) of patients received a metformin prescription within 1 year of a laboratory confirmed prediabetes result, including 2.4% of patients aged < 60 years and 10.4% of those with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. By a 3 year follow-up, 4.1% (n = 1901) received a metformin prescription, including 3.9% of patients aged < 60 years and 14.0% with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. Patients who developed type 2 diabetes within the 1 (n = 2,769) or 3 year (n = 7,268) follow-up periods were excluded from analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Few prediabetes patients who were either obese or aged < 60 years received a metformin prescription between 2012 and 2018. Prescription rates increased slightly between 1 and 3 years after a prediabetes diagnosis, so strategies to support timely intervention among higher risk patients with prediabetes are critically needed.

The Diabetes Prevention Gap And Opportunities To Increase Participation In Effective Interventions.

To understand the current state of prediabetes burden and treatment in the US, we examined recent trends in prediabetes prevalence, testing, and access to preventive resources. We estimated 13.5 percent prevalence of diagnosed prediabetes in the overall US adult population, using national survey data. Although prediabetes prevalence increased by 4.8 percentage points from 2010 to 2020, access to preventive resources remained low. The most effective intervention for diabetes prevention, known as the National Diabetes Prevention Program, remained woefully undersupplied and underused. There are only 2,098 National Diabetes Prevention Program-recognized providers nationally, and only 3 percent of adults with prediabetes have participated in the program. We suggest three actions to augment prevention efforts: increase payment for prevention interventions to avoid supply distortions, improve data integration and patient follow-up, and extend coverage and broaden access for preventive interventions. These actions, which would require policy-level changes, could lower the barriers to prevention.

The diabetes health plan and medication adherence among individuals with low incomes.

OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of the Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a diabetes-specific insurance plan that lowers out-of-pocket costs for diabetes-related medications and clinical visits, on adherence to oral hypoglycemic medications among low-income adults with Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM). DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: Cohort of adults (18-64) with T2DM, an annual household income

Differences in Weight Loss by Race and Ethnicity in the PRIDE Trial: a Qualitative Analysis of Participant Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Many Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) translation efforts have been less effective for underresourced populations. In the cluster-randomized Prediabetes Informed Decision and Education (PRIDE) trial, which evaluated a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention for diabetes prevention, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black participants lost less weight than non-Hispanic White participants at 12-month follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To explore perspectives about weight loss from PRIDE participants of different racial and ethnic groups. PARTICIPANTS: Sample of participants with prediabetes who were randomized to the PRIDE intervention arm (n=24). APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews within three groups stratified by DPP participation and % weight loss at 12 months: (DPP+/WL+, enrolled in DPP and lost >5% weight; DPP+/WL-, enrolled in DPP and lost <3% weight; DPP-/WL-, did not enroll in DPP and lost <3% weight). Each group was further subdivided on race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black (NHB), non-Hispanic White (NHW), Hispanic). Interviews were conducted on Zoom and transcripts were coded and analyzed with Dedoose. KEY RESULTS: Compared to NHW participants, Hispanic and NHB participants more often endorsed weight loss barriers of limited time to make lifestyle changes due to long work and commute hours, inconvenient DPP class locations and offerings, and limited disposable income for extra weight loss activities. Conversely, facilitators of weight loss regardless of race and ethnicity included retirement or having flexible work schedules; being able to identify convenient DPP classes; having a strong, positive support system; and purchasing supplementary resources to support lifestyle change (e.g., gym memberships, one-on-one activity classes). CONCLUSIONS: We found that NHB and Hispanic SDM participants report certain barriers to weight loss more commonly than NHW participants, particularly barriers related to limited disposable income and/or time constraints. Our findings suggest that increased lifestyle change support and flexible program delivery options may be needed to ensure equity in DPP reach, participant engagement, and outcomes.

Insulin Pump-related Inpatient Admissions in a National Sample of Youth With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Insulin pump use in type 1 diabetes management has significantly increased in recent years, but we have few data on its impact on inpatient admissions for acute diabetes complications. METHODS: We used the 2006, 2009, 2012, and 2019 Kids' Inpatient Database to identify all-cause type 1 diabetes hospital admissions in those with and without documented insulin pump use and insulin pump failure. We described differences in (1) prevalence of acute diabetes complications, (2) severity of illness during hospitalization and disposition after discharge, and (3) length of stay (LOS) and inpatient costs. RESULTS: We identified 228 474 all-cause admissions. Insulin pump use was documented in 7% of admissions, of which 20% were due to pump failure. The prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) was 47% in pump nonusers, 39% in pump users, and 60% in those with pump failure. Admissions for hyperglycemia without DKA, hypoglycemia, sepsis, and soft tissue infections were rare and similar across all groups. Admissions with pump failure had a higher proportion of admissions classified as major severity of illness (14.7%) but had the lowest LOS (1.60 days, 95% CI 1.55-1.65) and healthcare costs ($13 078, 95% CI $12 549-$13 608). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increased prevalence of insulin pump in the United States, a minority of pediatric admissions documented insulin pump use, which may represent undercoding. DKA admission rates were lower among insulin pump users compared to pump nonusers. Improved accuracy in coding practices and other approaches to identify insulin pump users in administrative data are needed, as are interventions to mitigate risk for DKA.

Implementation of Diabetes Prevention in Health Care Organizations: Best Practice Recommendations.

Approximately 1 in 3 American adults has prediabetes, a condition characterized by blood glucose levels that are above normal, not in the type 2 diabetes ranges, and that increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Evidence-based treatments can be used to prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in adults with prediabetes. The American Medical Association (AMA) has collaborated with health care organizations across the country to build sustainable diabetes prevention strategies. In 2017, the AMA formed the Diabetes Prevention Best Practices Workgroup (DPBP) with representatives from 6 health care organizations actively implementing diabetes prevention. Each organization had a unique strategy, but all included the National Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle change program as a core evidence-based intervention. DPBP established the goal of disseminating best practices to guide other health care organizations in implementing diabetes prevention and identifying and managing patients with prediabetes. Workgroup members recognized similarities in some of their basic steps and considerations and synthesized their practices to develop best practice recommendations for 3 strategy maturity phases. Recommendations for each maturity phase are classified into 6 categories: (1) organizational support; (2) workforce and funding; (3) promotion and dissemination; (4) clinical integration and support; (5) evaluation and outcomes; (6) and program. As the burden of chronic disease grows, prevention must be prioritized and integrated into health care. These maturity phases and best practice recommendations can be used by any health care organization committed to diabetes prevention. Further research is suggested to assess the impact and adoption of diabetes prevention best practices.

Evaluation of the University of California Diabetes Prevention Program (UC DPP) Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes can negatively impact long term health outcomes, healthcare costs and quality of life. However, intensive lifestyle interventions, including the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), can significantly lower risk of incident type 2 diabetes among overweight adults with prediabetes. Unfortunately, the majority of adults in the US who are at risk of developing diabetes do not engage in DPP-based lifestyle change programs. Increased adoption of evidence-based obesity and diabetes prevention interventions, such as the DPP, may help large employers reduce health risks and improve health outcomes among employees. In 2018, the University of California Office of thePresident (UCOP) implemented the UC DPP Initiative, a novel, multi-component program to address diabetes and obesity prevention across the UC system. METHODS: The goal of our study is to conduct a multifaceted evaluation of the UC DPP Initiative using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Our evaluation will integrate unique and diverse UC data sources, including electronic health record (EHR) data, administrative claims, campus-based DPP cohort data, qualitative interviews and site visits. Our primary outcome of interest is the mean percent weight change among three groups of overweight/obese UC beneficiaries at risk for diabetes at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include mean percent weight change at 24-month follow-up, barriers and facilitators associated with implementatio, as well as  the degree of program adoption and maintenance. DISCUSSION: Our study will help inform diabetes and obesity prevention efforts across the UC system. Findings from this evaluation will also be highly applicable to universities and large employers, as well as community organizers, healthcare organizations and insurers implementing the DPP and/or other health promotion interventions.