A Randomized Controlled Trial to Improve Unmet Social Needs and Clinical Outcomes Among Adults with Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes often face financial challenges and other unmet social needs to effective diabetes self-management. OBJECTIVE: Whether a digital intervention focused on addressing socioeconomic determinants of health improves diabetes clinical outcomes more than usual care. DESIGN: Randomized trial from 2019 to 2023. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 600 adults with diabetes, HbA1c ≥ 7.5%, and self-reported unmet social needs or financial burden from a health system and randomized to the intervention or standard care. INTERVENTION: CareAvenue is an automated, e-health intervention with eight videos that address unmet social needs contributing to poor outcomes. MEASURES: Primary outcome was HbA1c, measured at baseline, and 6 and 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes included systolic blood pressure and reported met social needs, cost-related non-adherence (CRN), and financial burden. We examined main effects and variation in effects across predefined subgroups. RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of CareAvenue participants completed one or more modules of the website. At 12-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in HbA1c changes between CareAvenue and control group (p = 0.24). There were also no significant between-group differences in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.29), met social needs (p = 0.25), CRN (p = 0.18), and perceived financial burden (p = 0.31). In subgroup analyses, participants with household incomes 100-400% FPL (1.93 (SE = 0.76), p < 0.01), 201-400% FPL (1.30 (SE = 0.62), p < 0.04), and > 400% FPL (1.27 (SE = 0.64), p < 0.05) had significantly less A1c decreases compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: On average, CareAvenue participants did not achieve better A1c lowering, met needs, CRN, or perceived financial burden compared to control participants. CareAvenue participants with higher incomes achieved significantly less A1c reductions than control. Further research is needed on social needs interventions that consider tailored approaches to population subgroups. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03950973, May 2019.

Diabetes distress mediates the relationship between depressive symptoms and glycaemic control among adults with type 2 diabetes: Findings from a multi-site diabetes peer support intervention.

AIMS: Diabetes distress is positively associated with HbA1c and may mediate the relationship between depressive symptoms and HbA1c . This study examined these relationships in a geographically, socioeconomically, and ethnically diverse sample of adults with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using data from five US sites evaluating peer support for diabetes management (n = 917), Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) examined whether diabetes distress (four items from Diabetes Distress Scale) mediated the relationship between depressive symptoms (PHQ-8) and HbA1c . Sites compared interventions of varying content and duration with control conditions. Time from Baseline Assessment to Final Assessment varied from six to 18 months. Site characteristics were controlled by entering site as a covariate along with age, sex, education, diabetes duration, insulin use, and intervention/control assignment. RESULTS: Depressive symptoms, diabetes distress, and HbA1c were all intercorrelated cross-sectionally and from Baseline to Final Assessment (rs from 0.10 to 0.57; ps <0.05). In SEM analyses, diabetes distress at Final Assessment mediated the relationship between Baseline depressive symptoms and HbA1c at Final Assessment (indirect effect: b = 0.031, p < 0.001), controlling for Baseline HbA1c and covariates. Parallel analysis of whether depressive symptoms mediated the relationship between Baseline diabetes distress and HbA1c at Final Assessment was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: In this diverse sample, diabetes distress mediated the influence of depressive symptoms on HbA1c but the reverse, depressive symptoms mediating the effect of distress, was not found. These findings add to the evidence that diabetes distress is a worthy intervention target to improve clinical status and quality of life among individuals with type 2 diabetes.

The Support, Educate, Empower personalized glaucoma coaching trial design.

BACKGROUND: Glaucoma is a chronic disease that affects 3 million Americans. Glaucoma is most often asymptomatic until very late in its course when treatment is more difficult and extensive peripheral vision loss has already occurred. Taking daily medications can mitigate this vision loss, but at least half of people with glaucoma do not take their prescribed medications regularly. The purpose of this study is to improve glaucoma medication adherence among those with medically treated glaucoma and poor self-reported adherence using the Support, Educate, Empower personalized coaching program. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a two-site randomized controlled trial enrolling 230 participants with poor self-reported glaucoma medication adherence. The trial has two arms, an intervention arm and a control arm. Participants in the intervention arm receive personalized glaucoma education and motivational interviewing-based coaching over 6 months from a trained non-physician interventionist for three in-person sessions with between visit phone calls for check-ins where current adherence level is reported to participants. Participants also can elect to have visual, audio, text or automated phone call medication dose reminders. Participants in the control arm continue usual care with their physician and receive non-personalized glaucoma educational materials via mail in parallel to the three in-person coaching sessions to control for glaucoma knowledge content. All participants receive a medication adherence monitor. The primary outcome is the proportion of prescribed doses taken on schedule during the 6-month period. The secondary outcome is glaucoma related distress. The exploratory outcome is intraocular pressure. DISCUSSION: The personalized education and motivational-interviewing-based intervention that we are testing is comprehensive in that it addresses the wide range of barriers to adherence that people with glaucoma encounter. Leveraging a custom-built web-based application to generate the personalized content and the motivational-interviewing-based prompts to guide the coaching sessions will make this program both replicable and scalable and can be integrated into clinical care utilizing trained non-physician providers. Although this type of self-management support is not currently reimbursed for glaucoma as it is for diabetes, this trial could help shape future policy change should the intervention be found effective.

Impact of a Dyadic Intervention on Family Supporter Involvement in Helping Adults Manage Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Family support for adults' diabetes care is associated with improved self-management and outcomes, but healthcare providers lack structured ways to engage those supporters. OBJECTIVE: Assess the impact of a patient-supporter diabetes management intervention on supporters' engagement in patients' diabetes care, support techniques, and caregiving experience. DESIGN: Multivariate regression models examined between-group differences in support-related measures observed as part of a larger trial randomizing participants to a dyadic intervention versus usual care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 239 adults with type 2 diabetes and either A1c >8% or systolic blood pressure >160mmHg enrolled with a family supporter. INTERVENTION: Health coaches provided training on positive support techniques and facilitated self-management information sharing and goal-setting. MAIN MEASURES: Patient and supporter reports at baseline and 12 months of supporter roles in diabetes care and caregiving experience. RESULTS: At 12 months, intervention-assigned patients had higher odds of reporting increased supporter involvement in remembering medical appointments (AOR 2.74, 95% CI 1.44, 5.21), performing home testing (AOR 2.40, 95% CI 1.29, 4.46), accessing online portals (AOR 2.34, 95% CI 1.29, 4.30), deciding when to contact healthcare providers (AOR 2.12, 95% CI 1.15, 3.91), and refilling medications (AOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.14, 3.89), but not with attending medical appointments or with healthy eating and exercise. Intervention-assigned patients reported increased supporter use of autonomy supportive communication (+0.27 points on a 7-point scale, p=0.02) and goal-setting techniques (+0.30 points on a 5-point scale, p=0.01). There were no differences at 12 months in change scores measuring supporter distress about patients' diabetes or caregiving burden. Intervention-assigned supporters had significantly larger increases in satisfaction with health system support for their role (+0.88 points on a 10-point scale, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A dyadic patient-supporter intervention led to increased family supporter involvement in diabetes self-management and increased use of positive support techniques, without increasing caregiver stress.

Feasibility and acceptability of a toolkit-based process to implement patient-centered, immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception services.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines recommend that maternity systems provide patient-centered access to immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (ie, insertion of an intrauterine device or implant during the delivery hospitalization). Hospitals face significant barriers to offering these services, and efforts to improve peripartum contraception care quality have met with mixed success. Implementation toolkits-packages of resources and strategies to facilitate the implementation of new services-are a promising approach for guiding clinical practice change. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a theory-informed toolkit, evaluate the feasibility of toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception care in a single site, and refine the toolkit and implementation process for future effectiveness testing. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a single-site feasibility study of the toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum contraception services at a large academic medical center in 2017 to 2020. Based on previous qualitative work, we developed a theory-informed implementation toolkit. A stakeholder panel selected toolkit resources to use in a multicomponent implementation intervention at the study site. These resources included tools and strategies designed to optimize implementation conditions (ie, implementation leadership, planning, and evaluation; the financial environment; engagement of key stakeholders; patient needs; compatibility with workflow; and clinician and staff knowledge, skills, and attitudes). The implementation intervention was executed from January 2018 to April 2019. Study outcomes included implementation outcomes (ie, provider perceptions of the implementation process and implementation tools [assessed via online provider survey]) and healthcare quality outcomes (ie, trends in prenatal contraceptive counseling, trends in immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive utilization [both ascertained by institutional administrative data], and the patient experience of contraceptive care [assessed via serial, cross-sectional, online patient survey items adapted from the National Quality Forum-endorsed, validated Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling measure]). RESULTS: In the implementation process, among 172 of 401 eligible clinicians (43%) participating in surveys, 70% were "extremely" or "somewhat" satisfied with the implementation process overall. In the prenatal contraceptive counseling, among 4960 individuals undergoing childbirth at the study site in 2019, 1789 (36.1%) had documented prenatal counseling about postpartum contraception. Documented counseling rates increased overall throughout 2019 (Q1, 12.5%; Q4, 51.0%) but varied significantly by clinic site (Q4, range 30%-79%). Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception utilization increased throughout the study period (before implementation, 5.46% of deliveries; during implementation, 8.95%; after implementation, 8.58%). In the patient experience of contraceptive care, patient survey respondents (response rate, 15%-29%) were largely White (344/425 [81%]) and highly educated (309/425 [73%] with at least a 4-year college degree), reflecting the study site population. Scores were poor across settings, with modest improvements in the hospital setting from 2018 to 2020 (prenatal visits, 67%-63%; hospitalization, 45%-58%; outpatient after delivery, 69%-65%). Based on these findings, toolkit refinements included additional resources designed to routinize prenatal contraceptive counseling and support a more patient-centered experience of contraceptive care. CONCLUSION: A toolkit-based process to implement immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive services at a single academic center was associated with high acceptability but mixed healthcare quality outcomes. Toolkit resources were added to optimize counseling rates and the patient experience of contraceptive care. Future research should formally test the effectiveness of the refined toolkit in a multisite, prospective trial.

Impact on Health Care Utilization and Costs of a Medicaid Community Health Worker Program in Detroit, 2018-2020: A Randomized Program Evaluation.

Objectives. To compare health care utilization and costs between beneficiaries randomly assigned to usual services versus a community health worker (CHW) program implemented by 3 Medicaid health plans. Methods. From February 2018 to June 2019, beneficiaries residing in Detroit, Michigan's Cody Rouge neighborhood with more than 3 emergency department (ED) visits or at least 1 ambulatory care‒sensitive hospitalization in the previous 12 months were randomized. CHWs reached out to eligible beneficiaries to assess their needs and link them to services. We compared ED and ambulatory care visits, hospitalizations, and related costs over 12 months. Results. In intention-to-treat analyses among 2457 beneficiaries, the 1389 randomized to the CHW program had lower adjusted ratios of ED visits (adjusted rate ratio [ARR] = 0.96; P < .01) and ED visit costs (ARR = 0.96; P < .01), but higher adjusted ratios of ambulatory care costs (ARR = 1.15; P < .01) and no differences in inpatient or total costs compared with the usual-care group. Conclusions. Initial increases in ambulatory care use from effective programs for underserved communities may mitigate savings from decreased acute care use. Longer-term outcomes should be followed to assess potential cost savings from improved health. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03924713. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):766-775. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306700).

Predictors and Effects of Participation in Peer Support: A Prospective Structural Equation Modeling Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peer support provides varied health benefits, but how it achieves these benefits is not well understood. PURPOSE: Examine a) predictors of participation in peer support interventions for diabetes management, and b) relationship between participation and glycemic control. METHODS: Seven peer support interventions funded through Peers for Progress provided pre/post data on 1,746 participants' glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c), contacts with peer supporters as an indicator of participation, health literacy, availability/satisfaction with support for diabetes management from family and clinical team, quality of life (EQ-Index), diabetes distress, depression (PHQ-8), BMI, gender, age, education, and years with diabetes. RESULTS: Structural equation modeling indicated a) lower levels of available support for diabetes management, higher depression scores, and older age predicted more contacts with peer supporters, and b) more contacts predicted lower levels of final HbA1c as did lower baseline levels of BMI and diabetes distress and fewer years living with diabetes. Parallel effects of contacts on HbA1c, although not statistically significant, were observed among those with baseline HbA1c values > 7.5% or > 9%. Additionally, no, low, moderate, and high contacts showed a significant linear, dose-response relationship with final HbA1c. Baseline and covariate-adjusted, final HbA1c was 8.18% versus 7.86% for those with no versus high contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Peer support reached/benefitted those at greater disadvantage. Less social support for dealing with diabetes and higher PHQ-8 scores predicted greater participation in peer support. Participation in turn predicted lower HbA1c across levels of baseline HbA1c, and in a dose-response relationship across levels of participation.

Risk factors for Veteran food insecurity: findings from a National US Department of Veterans Affairs Food Insecurity Screener.

OBJECTIVE: Food insecurity is associated with numerous adverse health outcomes. The US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) began universal food insecurity screening in 2017. This study examined prevalence and correlates of food insecurity among Veterans screened. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study using VHA administrative data. Multivariable logistic regression models were estimated to identify sociodemographic and medical characteristics associated with a positive food insecurity screen. SETTING: All US Veterans Administration (VA) medical centres (n 161). PARTICIPANTS: All Veterans were screened for food insecurity since screening initiation (July 2017-December 2018). RESULTS: Of 3 304 702 Veterans screened for food insecurity, 44 298 were positive on their initial screen (1·3 % of men; 2·0 % of women). Food insecurity was associated with identifying as non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic. Veterans who were non-married/partnered, low-income Veterans without VA disability-related compensation and those with housing instability had higher odds of food insecurity, as did Veterans with a BMI < 18·5, diabetes, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder. Prior military sexual trauma (MST) was associated with food insecurity among both men and women. Women screening positive, however, were eight times more likely than men to have experienced MST (48·9 % v. 5·9 %). CONCLUSIONS: Food insecurity was associated with medical and trauma-related comorbidities as well as unmet social needs including housing instability. Additionally, Veterans of colour and women were at higher risk for food insecurity. Findings can inform development of tailored interventions to address food insecurity such as more frequent screening among high-risk populations, onsite support applying for federal food assistance programs and formal partnerships with community-based resources.

Peer mentorship to improve outcomes in patients on hemodialysis (PEER-HD): a randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis experience disproportionate morbidity and incur high healthcare-related costs. Much of this cost stems from potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Peer mentorship has been used effectively to improve outcomes for patients with complex chronic diseases. We propose testing the efficacy of peer mentorship on hospitalization rates among patients receiving hemodialysis. METHODS: This is a multicenter parallel group randomized controlled pragmatic trial of patients treated at hemodialysis facilities in Bronx, NY and Nashville, TN. The study has two phases. Phase 1 will enroll and train 16 hemodialysis patients (10 in Bronx, NY and 6 in Nashville TN) to be mentors using a program focused on enhancing self-efficacy, dialysis self-management and autonomy-supportive communication skills. Phase 2 will enroll 200 high risk adults receiving hemodialysis (140 in Bronx, NY and 60 in Nashville, TN), half of whom will be randomized to intervention and half to usual care. Intervention participants are assigned to weekly telephone calls with trained mentors (see Phase 1) for a 3-month period. The primary outcome of Phase 1 will be engagement of mentors with training and change in knowledge scores and autonomy skills from pre- to post-training. The primary outcome of Phase 2 will be the composite count of ED visits and hospitalizations at the end of study follow-up in patient participants assigned to intervention as compared to those assigned to usual care. Secondary outcomes for Phase 2 include the change over the trial period in validated survey scores measuring perception of social support and self-efficacy, and dialysis adherence metrics, among intervention participants as compared to usual care participants. DISCUSSION: The PEER-HD study will test the feasibility and efficacy of a pragmatic peer-mentorship program designed for patients receiving hemodialysis on ED visit and hospitalization rates. If effective, peer-mentorship holds promise as a scalable patient-centered intervention to decrease hospital resource utilization, and by extension morbidity and cost, for patients receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03595748 ; 7/23/2018. TRIAL SPONSOR: National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) 5R18DK118471. FUNDING: Funding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: R18DK118471. STUDY STATUS: This is an ongoing study and not complete. We are still collecting data for observational follow-up on participants. RELATED ARTICLES: No related articles for this study have been submitted to any journal. The study sponsor and funders had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of this data. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Barriers and Facilitators to Community Health Worker Outreach and Engagement in Detroit, Michigan: A Qualitative Study.

An effective approach to engaging populations who face health care access barriers is support from community health workers (CHWs). There is little research, however, on specific barriers and facilitators related to two key areas of CHW practice: outreach, defined as the ability to make any initial contact with the priority population, and engagement, defined as the ability to continue to work with the priority population after initial contact is made. The current qualitative study is ancillary to a randomized evaluation of a CHW-led program for Medicaid Health Plan enrollees. Implementation experiences with outreach and engagement led the evaluators to develop the current study in which health plan and nonhealth plan CHWs (n = 12) serving low-income, predominantly Black populations in Detroit participated in qualitative semistructured interviews to elucidate barriers and facilitators to outreach and engagement. All audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. The study team used inductive qualitative data analysis techniques. Barriers to outreach included inaccurate contact information and mistrust. Barriers to engagement included lack of ability to provide needed resources, leading to hopelessness and diminished trust, and discontinuity of services due to eligibility changes and terminated programs. Facilitators included adapting outreach schedules and strategies to community needs, availability of resources, and relational strategies that leveraged CHW social proximity. Further research should systematically investigate the relative success of different CHW-led outreach and engagement strategies for specific populations so as to better design and implement CHW programs.

U.S. medical student knowledge and interest in asylum seeker medical care.

CONTEXT: Asylum seekers face significant and unique healthcare challenges, requiring healthcare practitioners, specifically in primary care, to be trained to care for this patient population. However, there is limited understanding of medical students' interest in and future ability to care for the population of asylum seekers in the United States. PROJECT AIMS: We aim to understand U.S. medical students' interest, experience, and knowledge in providing care for asylum seekers to assess the need for change in the ways in which medical schools introduce asylum seeker care to learners. DESCRIPTION: A 23-question survey was administered to U.S. medical students at four institutions with asylum programmes affiliated with Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) from June 2020 to March 2021, querying various aspects of providing care to asylum seekers. OUTCOMES: Of the approximately 2846 students who received the survey, 436 students (15%) completed it in its entirety. Most respondents desired training about caring for asylum seekers (91%). Over half (52%) rated their knowledge of asylum issues overall as 'poor' or 'none', and 73% thought their medical school's curriculum on asylum seeker health needed improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students at schools with affiliated asylum clinics desire to care for asylum seeker patients but feel unprepared to do so, highlighting an unmet need for formal asylum education in U.S. medical schools.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Diabetes Shared Medical Appointments (SMAs) as Implemented in Five Veterans Affairs Health Systems: a Multi-site Cluster Randomized Pragmatic Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether diabetes shared medical appointments (SMAs) implemented as part of usual clinical practice in diverse health systems are more effective than usual care in improving and sustaining A1c improvements. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A multi-site cluster randomized pragmatic trial examining implementation in clinical practice of diabetes SMAs in five Veterans Affairs (VA) health systems was conducted from 2016 to 2020 among 1537 adults with type 2 diabetes and elevated A1cs. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to either: (1) invitation to participate in a series of SMAs totaling 8-9 h; or (2) continuation of usual care. Relative change in A1c (primary outcome) and in systolic blood pressure, insulin starts, statin starts, and anti-hypertensive medication classes (secondary outcomes) were measured as part of usual clinical care at baseline, at 6 months and at 12 months (~7 months after conclusion of the final SMA in four of five sites). We examined outcomes in three samples of SMA participants: all those scheduled for a SMA, those attending at least one SMA, and those attending at least half of SMAs. RESULTS: Baseline mean A1c was 9.0%. Participants scheduled for an SMA achieved A1c reductions 0.35% points greater than the control group between baseline and 6-months follow up (p = .001). Those who attended at least one SMA achieved reductions 0.42 % points greater (p < .001), and those who attended at least half of scheduled SMAs achieved reductions 0.53 % points greater (p < .001) than the control group. At 12-month follow-up, the three SMA analysis samples achieved reductions from baseline ranging from 0.16 % points (p = 0.12) to 0.29 % points (p = .06) greater than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes SMAs as implemented in real-life diverse clinical practices improve glycemic control more than usual care immediately after the SMAs, but relative gains are not maintained. Our findings suggest the need for further study of whether a longer term SMA model or other follow-up strategies would sustain relative clinical improvements associated with this intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02132676.

Patient and provider perspectives of a new prenatal care model introduced in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials document the safety and efficacy of reduced frequency prenatal visit schedules and virtual visits, but real-world data are lacking. Our institution created a prenatal care delivery model incorporating these alternative approaches to continue safely providing prenatal care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate institutional-level adoption and patient and provider experiences with the coronavirus disease 2019 prenatal care model. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a single-site evaluation of a coronavirus disease 2019 prenatal care model incorporating a reduced frequency visit schedule and virtual visits deployed at a suburban academic institution on March 20, 2020. We used electronic health record data to evaluate institution-level model adoption, defined as changes in overall visit frequency and proportion of virtual visits in the 3 months before and after implementation. To evaluate the patient and provider experience with the coronavirus disease 2019 model, we conducted an online survey of all pregnant patients (>20 weeks' gestation) and providers in May 2020. Of note, 3 domains of care experience were evaluated: (1) access, (2) quality and safety, and (3) satisfaction. Quantitative data were analyzed with basic descriptive statistics. Free-text responses coded by the 3 survey domains elucidated drivers of positive and negative care experiences. RESULTS: After the coronavirus disease 2019 model adoption, average weekly prenatal visit volume fell by 16.1%, from 898 to 761 weekly visits; the average weekly proportion of prenatal visits conducted virtually increased from 10.8% (97 of 898) to 43.3% (330 of 761); and the average visit no-show rate remained stable (preimplementation, 4.3%; postimplementation, 4.2%). Of those eligible, 74.8% of providers (77 of 103) and 15.0% of patients (253 of 1690) participated in the surveys. Patient respondents were largely white (180 of 253; 71.1%) and privately insured (199 of 253; 78.7%), reflecting the study site population. The rates of chronic conditions and pregnancy complications also differed from national prevalence. Provider respondents were predominantly white (44 of 66; 66.7%) and female (50 of 66; 75.8%). Most patients and almost all providers reported that virtual visits improved access to care (patients, 174 of 253 [68.8%]; providers, 74 of 77 [96.1%]). More than half of respondents (patients, 124 of 253 [53.3%]; providers, 41 of 77 [62.1%]) believed that virtual visits were safe. Nearly all believed that home blood pressure cuffs were important for virtual visits (patients, 213 of 231 [92.2%]; providers, 63 of 66 [95.5%]). Most reported satisfaction with the coronavirus disease 2019 model (patients, 196 of 253 [77.5%]; providers, 64 of 77 [83.1%]). In free-text responses, drivers of positive care experiences were similar for patients and providers and included perceived improved access to care through decreased barriers (eg, transportation, childcare), perceived high quality of virtual visits for low-risk patients and increased safety during the pandemic, and improved satisfaction through better patient counseling. Perceived drivers of negative care experience were also similar for patients and providers, but less common. These included concerns that unequal access to virtual visits could deepen existing maternity care inequities, concerns that the lack of home devices (eg, blood pressure cuffs) would affect care quality and safety, and dissatisfaction with poor patient-provider continuity and inadequate expectation setting for the virtual visit experience. CONCLUSION: Reduced visit schedules and virtual visits were rapidly integrated into real-world care, with positive experiences for many patients and providers. Future research is needed to understand the health outcomes and care experience associated with alternative approaches to prenatal care delivery across more diverse patient populations outside of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic to inform broader health policy decisions.

Diabetes Distress Among Dyads of Patients and Their Health Supporters: Links With Functional Support, Metabolic Outcomes, and Cardiac Risk.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes (PWD) often experience diabetes distress which is associated with worse self-management and glycemic control. In contrast, PWD who receive support from family and friends (supporters) have better diabetes outcomes. PURPOSE: To examine the associations of PWD diabetes distress and supporters' distress about PWDs' diabetes with supporters' roles and PWD cardiometabolic outcomes. METHODS: We used baseline data from 239 adults with Type 2 diabetes and their supporters participating in a longitudinal trial. PWD and supporter diabetes distress (high vs. low) were determined using the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale-5. Outcomes included PWD-reported help from supporters with self-care activities, supporter-reported strain, PWD metabolic outcomes (glycemic control [HbA1c], systolic blood pressure [SBP], and non-HDL cholesterol) and 5 and 10 year risk of cardiac event (calculated using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study algorithm). RESULTS: PWDs with high diabetes distress were more likely to report that their supporters helped with taking medications, coordinating medical care, and home glucose testing (p's < .05), but not more likely to report help with diet or exercise. High supporter distress was associated with greater supporter strain (p < .001). High supporter diabetes distress was associated with higher PWD HbA1c (p = .045), non-HDL cholesterol (p = .011), and 5 (p = .002) and 10 year (p = .001) cardiac risk. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with high diabetes distress report more supporter help with medically focused self-management but not with diet and exercise. Supporter distress about PWD diabetes was consistently associated with worse outcomes. PWD diabetes distress had mixed associations with their diabetes outcomes.

Peer Coaching to Improve Diabetes Self-Management Among Low-Income Black Veteran Men: A Mixed Methods Assessment of Enrollment and Engagement.

PURPOSE: We undertook a study to ascertain patient characteristics associated with enrollment and engagement in a type 2 diabetes peer health coaching program at an urban health care facility serving predominantly Black veteran men, to improve the targeting of such programs. METHODS: A total of 149 patients declined enrollment in a randomized controlled trial but provided sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial information. A total of 290 patients enrolled and were randomized to 2 peer coaching programs; they provided sociodemographic, clinical, and survey data, and were analyzed according to their level of program engagement (167 engaged, 123 did not engage) irrespective of randomization group. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 14 engaged participants. RESULTS: Patients who enrolled were more likely to be Black men, have higher levels of education, have higher baseline hemoglobin A1c levels, describe their diabetes self-management as "fair" or "poor," and agree they "find it easy to get close to others" (P <.05 for each). At the program's end, patients who had engaged were more likely than those who had not to describe their peer coaches as being supportive of their autonomy (mean score, 85.4 vs 70.7; P <.001). The importance of coaches being encouraging, supportive, and having common ground/shared experiences with participants also emerged as key themes in interviews with engaged participants. CONCLUSION: Individuals with greatest perceived need were more likely to enroll in our trial of peer coaching, but the only factor associated with engagement was finding one's coach to support autonomy. Our findings reinforce the importance of training and ensuring fidelity of peer coaches to autonomy-supportive communication styles for participant engagement. In tailoring peer support programs for Black men, future research should elucidate which shared characteristics between participant and peer coach are most important for engagement and improved outcomes.Visual abstract.

Autonomy support from informal health supporters: links with self-care activities, healthcare engagement, metabolic outcomes, and cardiac risk among Veterans with type 2 diabetes.

This study examined the role of autonomy support from adults' informal health supporters (family or friends) in diabetes-specific health behaviors and health outcomes. Using baseline data from 239 Veterans with type 2 diabetes at risk of complications enrolled in behavioral trial, we examined associations between autonomy support from a support person and that support person's co-residence with the participant's diabetes self-care activities, patient activation, cardiometabolic measures, and predicted risk of a cardiac event. Autonomy support from supporters was associated with significantly increased adherence to healthy lifestyle behaviors (diet, p < .001 and exercise, p = .003); higher patient activation (p < .001); greater patient efficacy in interacting with healthcare providers, and lower 5-year (p = .044) and 10-year (p = .027) predicted cardiac risk. Autonomy support was not significantly associated with diabetes-specific behaviors (checking blood glucose, foot care, or medication taking); or hemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, or non-HDL cholesterol. There was a significant interaction of autonomy support and supporter residence in one model such that lack of autonomy support was associated with lower patient activation only among individuals with in-home supporters. No other interactions were significant. Findings suggest that autonomy support from family and friends may play a role in patient self-management, patient activation, and lower cardiac risk.

Health system interventions for adults with type 2 diabetes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Effective health system interventions may help address the disproportionate burden of diabetes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We assessed the impact of health system interventions to improve outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes in LMICs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, African Index Medicus, LILACS, and Global Index Medicus from inception of each database through February 24, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of health system interventions targeting adults with type 2 diabetes in LMICs. Eligible studies reported at least 1 of the following outcomes: glycemic change, mortality, quality of life, or cost-effectiveness. We conducted a meta-analysis for the glycemic outcome of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). GRADE and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care methods were used to assess risk of bias for the glycemic outcome and to prepare a summary of findings table. Of the 12,921 references identified in searches, we included 39 studies in the narrative review of which 19 were cluster RCTs and 20 were individual RCTs. The greatest number of studies were conducted in the East Asia and Pacific region (n = 20) followed by South Asia (n = 7). There were 21,080 total participants enrolled across included studies and 10,060 total participants in the meta-analysis of HbA1c when accounting for the design effect of cluster RCTs. Non-glycemic outcomes of mortality, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness had sparse data availability that precluded quantitative pooling. In the meta-analysis of HbA1c from 35 of the included studies, the mean difference was -0.46% (95% CI -0.60% to -0.31%, I2 87.8%, p < 0.001) overall, -0.37% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.10%, I2 60.0%, n = 7, p = 0.020) in multicomponent clinic-based interventions, -0.87% (-1.20% to -0.53%, I2 91.0%, n = 13, p < 0.001) in pharmacist task-sharing studies, and -0.27% (-0.50% to -0.04%, I2 64.1%, n = 7, p = 0.010) in trials of diabetes education or support alone. Other types of interventions had few included studies. Eight studies were at low risk of bias for the summary assessment of glycemic control, 15 studies were at unclear risk, and 16 studies were at high risk. The certainty of evidence for glycemic control by subgroup was moderate for multicomponent clinic-based interventions but was low or very low for other intervention types. Limitations include the lack of consensus definitions for health system interventions, differences in the quality of underlying studies, and sparse data availability for non-glycemic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that health system interventions for type 2 diabetes may be effective in improving glycemic control in LMICs, but few studies are available from rural areas or low- or lower-middle-income countries. Multicomponent clinic-based interventions had the strongest evidence for glycemic benefit among intervention types. Further research is needed to assess non-glycemic outcomes and to study implementation in rural and low-income settings.

Peer Support for Self-Management of Chronic Pain: the Evaluation of a Peer Coach-Led Intervention to Improve Pain Symptoms (ECLIPSE) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain self-management is an effective, evidence-based treatment for chronic pain. Peer support, in which patients serve as coaches for other patients, has been effective in other chronic conditions and is a potentially promising approach to implementing pain self-management programs using fewer clinical resources. OBJECTIVE: To test a peer coach-delivered pain self-management program for chronic pain. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. INTERVENTION: Intervention patients were assigned a trained peer coach for 6 months. Coaches, who were volunteers, were asked to contact their assigned patients, either by phone or in person, twice per month. Coaches and patients were given an intervention manual to guide sessions. The control group was offered a 2-hour pain self-management class. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was total pain, assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, self-efficacy, social support, patient activation, health-related quality of life, and healthcare utilization. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 6 months, and 9 months. KEY RESULTS: Two hundred fifteen patients enrolled (120 intervention, 95 control). Adherence to intervention protocol was low, with only 13% of patients reporting having at least the recommended 12 peer coach meetings over the 6-month intervention. BPI total decreased from baseline to 6 months and baseline to 9 months in both groups. At 9 months, this change was statistically significant (intervention, - 0.40, p = 0.018; control, - 0.47, p = 0.006). There was not a statistically significant difference between groups on BPI at either time point. No secondary outcomes improved significantly in either group after adjusting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Patients randomized to peer support did not differ from control patients on primary and secondary outcomes. Other peer support models that do not rely on volunteers might be more effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380690.