Promoting REproductive Planning And REadiness in Diabetes (PREPARED) Study protocol: a clinic-randomised controlled trial testing a technology-based strategy to promote preconception care for women with type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Women with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are more likely to experience adverse reproductive outcomes, yet preconception care can significantly reduce these risks. For women with T2DM, preconception care includes reproductive planning and patient education on: (1) the importance of achieving glycaemic control before pregnancy, (2) using effective contraception until pregnancy is desired, (3) discontinuing teratogenic medications if pregnancy could occur, (4) taking folic acid, and (5) managing cardiovascular and other risks. Despite its importance, few women with T2DM receive recommended preconception care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are conducting a two-arm, clinic-randomised trial at 51 primary care practices in Chicago, Illinois to evaluate a technology-based strategy to 'hardwire' preconception care for women of reproductive age with T2DM (the PREPARED (Promoting REproductive Planning And REadiness in Diabetes) strategy) versus usual care. PREPARED leverages electronic health record (EHR) technology before and during primary care visits to: (1) promote medication safety, (2) prompt preconception counselling and reproductive planning, and (3) deliver patient-friendly educational tools to reinforce counselling. Post-visit, text messaging is used to: (4) encourage healthy lifestyle behaviours. English and Spanish-speaking women, aged 18-44 years, with T2DM will be enrolled (N=840; n=420 per arm) and will receive either PREPARED or usual care based on their clinic's assignment. Data will be collected from patient interviews and the EHR. Outcomes include haemoglobin A1c (primary), reproductive knowledge and self-management behaviours. We will use generalised linear mixed-effects models (GLMMs) to evaluate the impact of PREPARED on these outcomes. GLMMs will include a fixed effect for treatment assignment (PREPARED vs usual care) and random clinic effects. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Northwestern University Institutional Review Board (STU00214604). Study results will be published in journals with summaries shared online and with participants upon request. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04976881).

Development and Validation of the HL6: a Brief, Technology-Based Remote Measure of Health Literacy.

BACKGROUND: Most health literacy measures require in-person administration or rely upon self-report. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and test the feasibility of a brief, objective health literacy measure that could be deployed via text messaging or online survey. DESIGN: Participants were recruited from ongoing NIH studies to complete a phone interview and online survey to test candidate items. Psychometric analyses included parallel analysis for dimensionality and item response theory. After 9 months, participants were randomized to receive the final instrument via text messaging or online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred six English and Spanish-speaking adults with ≥ 1 chronic condition MAIN MEASURES: Thirty-three candidate items for the new measure and patient-reported physical function, anxiety, depression, and medication adherence. All participants previously completed the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) in parent NIH studies. KEY RESULTS: Participants were older (average 67 years), 69.6% were female, 44.3% were low income, and 22.0% had a high school level of education or less. Candidate items loaded onto a single factor (RMSEA: 0.04, CFI: 0.99, TLI: 0.98, all loadings >.59). Six items were chosen for the final measure, named the HL6. Items demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (α=0.73) and did not display differential item functioning by language. Higher HL6 scores were significantly associated with greater educational attainment (r=0.41), higher NVS scores (r=0.55), greater physical functioning (r=0.26), fewer depressive symptoms (r=-0.20), fewer anxiety symptoms (r=-0.15), and fewer barriers to medication adherence (r=-0.30; all p<.01). In feasibility testing, 75.2% of participants in the text messaging arm completed the HL6 versus 66.2% in the online survey arm (p=0.09). Socioeconomic disparities in completion were more common in the online survey arm. CONCLUSIONS: The HL6 demonstrates adequate reliability and validity in both English and Spanish. This performance-based assessment can be administered remotely using commonly available technologies with fewer logistical challenges than assessments requiring in-person administration.