Rationale and design of the linking education, produce provision, and community referrals to improve diabetes care (LINK) study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) experiencing food insecurity may have other non-medical, health-related social needs (e.g., transportation, housing instability) that decrease their ability to attain T2D control and impact other health outcomes. METHODS: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial (pRCT) to test the effect of produce provision, diabetes and culinary skills training and education, and social needs screening, navigation, and resolution, on hemoglobin A1c (A1c) levels in individuals with T2D (A1c ≥7.5%) experiencing food insecurity; a cost-effectiveness evaluation of the interventions that comprise the pRCT; and a process evaluation to understand the contextual factors that impact the uptake, effectiveness, and sustainability of the interventions. SETTING: Ambulatory care clinics (e.g., family medicine, general internal medicine, endocrinology) affiliated with an academic medical center in an urban environment in the Midwest. DESIGN: 2 × 2 factorial design. INTERVENTIONS: Cooking Matters for Diabetes is a 6-week diabetes and culinary education intervention. The Health Impact Ohio Central Ohio Pathways Hub intervention is a community health worker model designed to evaluate and address participants' social needs. All participants will receive referral to the Mid-Ohio Farmacy to provide weekly access to fresh produce. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome of the pRCT is change in A1c at 3 months; secondary outcomes include A1c at 6 months, and diabetes self-efficacy, food insecurity, and diet quality at 3 and 6 months. DISCUSSION: Food insecurity, unmet social needs, diabetes education and self-efficacy are critical issues that must be addressed to improve T2D treatment, care, and health equity. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT05472441.

Multi-stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of a clinic-based food referral program for patients with chronic conditions: a qualitative examination.

Clinic-based food referral programs (FRPs) may help alleviate food insecurity and improve access to nutritious foods by systematically identifying and referring food-insecure primary care patients to community-based food resources. The purpose of this study was to examine the barriers to and facilitators of implementation of an FRP offered to primary care patients who screen positive for food insecurity and have a qualifying chronic condition. we used a multi-stakeholder approach to conduct semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers and administrators from an academic medical center (AMC) (n = 20), representatives of a regional foodbank and its affiliated pantries (n = 11), and patients referred to the FRP (n = 20), during the initial phase of FRP implementation from April to September 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded using a deductive dominant approach that allowed for the identification of emergent themes. Seven major themes emerged across the two domains of analysis: barriers to and facilitators of FRP implementation. Key barriers were (a) provider time constraints and competing demands; (b) inadequate physician feedback regarding patient use of the program; (c) patient transportation barriers; and (d) stigma associated with food pantry use. Key facilitators of implementation included (a) program champions; (b) screening and referral coordination; and (c) addressing food pantry-related stigma. This study identifies factors that deter and facilitate the implementation of an AMC-based FRP. Our findings highlight opportunities for healthcare and community-based organizations to refine and optimize FRP models toward the ultimate aim of advancing health equity for food-insecure patients.

Food insecurity can make the self-management of diet-related chronic conditions (e.g., diabetes, hypertension, and obesity) difficult. Clinic-based food referral programs (FRPs) can help address the diet-related needs of food-insecure primary care patients by improving access to nutritious foods. However, the factors contributing to successful FRP implementation in primary care settings are underexplored. The focus of this study was to explore the barriers to and facilitators of implementation of an FRP offered to food-insecure primary care patients with chronic conditions seen at an academic medical center using a multi-stakeholder approach. Competing clinical and patient demands, patient transportation barriers, and food pantry-related stigma were salient factors that prevented healthcare providers and patients from engaging fully with the FRP. Inadequate provider feedback about patients' use of the FRP was also cited as a deterrent to greater provider engagement with the FRP. Critical facilitators of implementation included support and encouragement from program champions and having a coordinated referral process. The intentional branding and presentation of the FRP to eligible patients may have helped encourage its use by destigmatizing the food pantry setting. The impact of optimizing FRP implementation on patient use and program effectiveness warrants further research.

Community coalition and key stakeholder perceptions of the community opioid epidemic before an intensive community-level intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdoses are a major public health emergency in the United States. Despite effective treatments that can save lives, access to and utilization of such treatments are limited. Community context plays an important role in addressing treatment barriers and increasing access. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) is a multisite community-level cluster-randomized trial that will study implementation and outcomes of a community coalition-based intervention (Communities that HEAL [CTH]) that implements evidence-based practices (EBPs) to reduce opioid overdose deaths in four states. To examine contextual factors critical to understanding implementation, we assessed the perspectives of community members about their communities, current substance use-related services, and other important issues that could impact intervention implementation. METHODS: Researchers conducted 382 semi-structured qualitative interviews in the HCS communities. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed; researchers subsequently analyzed data using directed content analysis based on the constructs of the RE-AIM/PRISM implementation science framework to identify key themes within the external community context. RESULTS: Despite the diversity in states and communities, four similar themes related to the external community context emerged across communities: These themes included the importance of understanding: 1) community risk perceptions, 2) levels of stigma, 3) the health services environment and the availability of substance use services, and 4) funding for substance use services. CONCLUSION: Understanding and addressing the external community context in which the CTH intervention and EBPs are implemented are crucial for successful health services-related and community engaged interventions. While implementing EBPs is a challenging undertaking, doing so will help us to understand if and how a community-based intervention can successfully reduce opioid overdose deaths and influence both community beliefs and the community treatment landscape.

Exploring perspectives on changing opioid prescribing practices: A qualitative study of community stakeholders in the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: Community-based perspectives are needed to more broadly inform policy-makers, public health practitioners, prescribers, and pharmacists about community-led and broader efforts to reduce opioid overprescribing, and ultimately reduce prescription opioid use disorder, overdoses and fatalities. The aim of this study is to explore community-based perspectives on efforts to change opioid prescribing practices in their communities. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 388 community stakeholders across four states (Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio) from November 2019 to January 2020 about community approaches and goals of community-led responses to the opioid crisis. Data analysis combined deductive and inductive approaches to identify themes and sub-themes related to improving opioid prescribing practices. RESULTS: Three major themes and different subthemes were characterized: (1) acknowledging progress (i.e., healthcare providers being part of the solution, provider education, and prescription drug monitoring programs); (2) emergent challenges (i.e., physician nonadherence with safer opioid prescribing guidelines, difficulty identifying appropriate use of opioids, and concerns about accelerating the progression from opioid misuse to drug abuse); and (3) opportunities for change (i.e., educating patients about safer use and proper disposal of opioids, expanding prescriber and pharmacist education, changing unrealistic expectations around eliminating pain, expanding and increasing insurance coverage for alternative treatment options). CONCLUSIONS: Community stakeholders appeared to support specific opportunities to reduce prescription opioid misuse and improve safer prescribing. The opportunities included culture change around pain expectations, awareness of safe disposal, additional provider education, and increased coverage and acceptability of non-opioid treatments.