Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes.

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

This article was copublished in Diabetes Care 2017;40:1409-1419 and The Diabetes Educator 2017;43:449-464 and is reprinted with permission. The previous version of this article, also copublished in Diabetes Care and The Diabetes Educator, can be found at Diabetes Care 2012;35:2393-2401 (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-1707).

Diabetes self-management education and training among privately insured persons with newly diagnosed diabetes--United States, 2011-2012.

Diabetes is a complex chronic disease that requires active involvement of patients in its management. Diabetes self-management education and training (DSMT), "the ongoing process of facilitating the knowledge, skill, and ability necessary for prediabetes and diabetes self-care," is an important component of integrated diabetes care. It is an intervention in which patients learn about diabetes and how to implement the self-management that is imperative to control the disease. The curriculum of DSMT often includes the diabetes disease process and treatment options; healthy lifestyle; blood glucose monitoring; preventing, detecting and treating diabetes complications; and developing personalized strategies for decision making. The American Diabetes Association recommends providing DSMT to those with newly diagnosed diabetes, because data suggest that when diabetes is first diagnosed is the time when patients are most receptive to such engagement. However, little is known about the proportion of persons with newly diagnosed diabetes participating in DSMT. CDC analyzed data from the Marketscan Commercial Claims and Encounters database (Truven Health Analytics) for the period 2009-2012 to estimate the claim-based proportion of privately insured adults (aged 18-64 years) with newly diagnosed diabetes who participated in DSMT during the first year after diagnosis. During 2011-2012, an estimated 6.8% of privately insured, newly diagnosed adults participated in DSMT during the first year after diagnosis of diabetes. These data suggest that there is a large gap between the recommended guideline and current practice, and that there is both an opportunity and a need to enhance rates of DSMT participation among persons newly diagnosed with diabetes.

Consensus Guidance for Monitoring Individuals With Islet Autoantibody-Positive Pre-Stage 3 Type 1 Diabetes.

Given the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programs are being increasingly emphasized. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk for (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in nonspecialized settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF, in conjunction with international experts and societies, developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: 1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary care providers to care for people who are IAb+; 2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified, there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; 3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; 4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; 5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and 6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasizes significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigor of future recommendations and inform clinical care.

Current and Emerging Trends in Diabetes Care and Education: 2021 National Practice and Workforce Survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the National Practice Survey is to understand current trends related to the diabetes care and education specialist's integration into the full care team beyond formal diabetes self-management education and support services. METHODS: The 2021 National Practice Survey (NPS2021) contained 61 questions for all respondents with an additional 56 questions pertaining to specific diabetes care and education segments. An anonymous survey was administered online to respondents who are diabetes care and education specialists or a part of the diabetes care team. Email lists were obtained from the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists (ADCES) and the Certification Board for Diabetes Care and Education (CBDCE). Approximately 39,258 emails were sent, and 3357 were undeliverable, with 3797 surveys completed between February 9 to April 6, 2021, resulting in an 11% response rate. The response rate may have been affected by the COVID-19 public health emergency. RESULTS: Diabetes care and education specialists represent an interprofessional specialty of nurses, dietitians, physicians, pharmacists, health educators, and others. Many respondents reported holding either certification as a Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialist (CDCES) or being Board Certified in Advanced Diabetes Management (BC-ADM). In addition, there appears to be a slight increase in those trained as a Lifestyle Coach to provide the National Diabetes Prevention Program (CDC Recognized National DPP) compared to NPS2017. Most respondents reported being Caucasian/White (84%), followed by Hispanic or Latinx (7%) and African American/Black and Asian/Asian American (at 4% each), like in previous surveys. Respondents reported diverse care delivery models, including traditional and nontraditional services, and expanded models of care such as population health/risk stratification models, the Chronic Care Model, Accountable Care Organizations, managed care, and others. CONCLUSION: The NPS2021 describes DCES workforce opportunities and challenges. Identifying and addressing those that impact the specialty's sustainability, diversity, and growth will guide strategies for the future workforce and their practice settings. Opportunities identified include embracing diabetes community care coordinators for person-centered delivery of care and education services and supporting frontline health care team members to increase competence and expertise in the prevention of type 2 diabetes, diabetes care, and education/support for related chronic diseases. In addition, as health care evolves, it creates opportunities for the DCESs to demonstrate a broader, key role as part of the diabetes care team.

An Effective Model of Diabetes Care and Education: The ADCES7 Self-Care Behaviors™.

PURPOSE: The ADCES7 Self-Care Behaviors™ (ADCES7) is a robust framework for self-management of diabetes and other related conditions, such as prediabetes and cardiometabolic diseases. It is the position of the Association of Diabetes Care and Education Specialists (ADCES) that at the cornerstone of diabetes self-management education and support, the ADCES7 is the framework for achieving behavior change that leads to effective self-management through improved behavior and clinical outcome measures. The ADCES7 model guides the health care team in effective person-centered collaboration and goal setting to achieve health-related outcomes and improved quality of life. Continued research and evidence are critical to expand this model and broaden its application to other chronic conditions. Given the advances in the science of diabetes management as well as diabetes self-management education and support, ADCES has evaluated the ADCES7 within the framework of these advances, including the digital and dynamic health care landscape. CONCLUSION: This revised position statement blends the updates in research and ADCES's vision and expansion beyond diabetes to refresh the ADCES7 framework. This revision reflects the perspectives of all members of the health care team as they problem solve with individuals who are at risk for or who have diabetes and related conditions to achieve healthier outcomes.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. METHODS: The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. RESULTS: Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Competencies for Diabetes Care and Education Specialists.

PURPOSE: Diabetes care and education specialists provide collaborative, comprehensive, and person-centered care and education to people with diabetes and cardiometabolic conditions. The implementation of the vision for the specialty has prompted the need to reexamine the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for diabetes care and education specialists in today's dynamic health care environment. The purpose of this article is to introduce an updated set of competencies reflective of the profession in this dynamic health care environment. Diabetes care and education specialists are health care professionals who have achieved a core body of knowledge and skills in the biological and social sciences, communication, counseling, and education and who have experience in the care of people with diabetes and related conditions. Members of this specialty encompass a diverse set of health disciplines, including nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, physicians, mental health professionals, podiatrists, optometrists, exercise physiologists, physicians, and others. The competencies are intended to guide practice regardless of discipline and encourage mastery through continuing education, individual study, and mentorship. CONCLUSION: This document articulates the competencies required for diabetes care and education specialists in today's dynamic health care environment as they pursue excellence in the specialty.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. METHODS: The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. RESULTS: Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Evaluating the Impact of Year-Long, Augmented Diabetes Self-Management Support.

This was a randomized controlled study to test a scalable intervention model addressing the need for ongoing diabetes support. The study included individuals receiving care in a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) with HbA1c >8. The aim of this project was to determine whether augmenting diabetes self-management education (DSME) with support for an economically vulnerable population might better meet patient needs and reduce morbidity and premature mortality. The intervention utilized pre and post comparisons and was designed to test the efficacy of a telephonic diabetes support intervention to increase patient engagement in self-care and with the health care system as a means to improve clinical outcomes. There were significant improvements in HbA1c, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and depression screening scores in the year following DSME. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. This randomized controlled study demonstrated that comprehensive face-to-face care with consistent assessment and documentation over time in FQHCs produce clinically significant and predictable improvement for people with diabetes. The addition of structured provision of telephonic support overlapping in time with the comprehensive face-to-face process of care in this environment did not produce statistically significant clinical or behavioral care improvement.

Population Health: The Diabetes Educator's Evolving Role.

PURPOSE: The US health care system's focus on high-quality, efficient, and cost-effective care has led payers and provider groups to identify new models with a shift toward value-based care. This perspective on clinical practice describes the population health movement and the opportunities for diabetes educators beyond diabetes self-management education, as well as steps to engage in and drive new care models to demonstrate individual, organizational, and payer value. CONCLUSION: Diabetes educators have an opportunity to position themselves as diabetes specialists for diabetes management, education, and population health care delivery. With expertise that extends beyond diabetes self-management education and with a wide variety of skills, diabetes educators recognize that there is a range of personal, social, economic, and environmental factors that influence diabetes health outcomes. Diabetes educators should align with organizational strategic plans and support the population-level performance measures and quality initiatives, thus enhancing the value that diabetes educators bring to health care organizations.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. METHODS: The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. RESULTS: Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

The 2017 Diabetes Educator and the Diabetes Self-Management Education National Practice Survey.

Purpose The American Association of Diabetes Educators conducts the National Practice Survey (NPS) biennially to document current practice in diabetes education in the United States. The purpose of the study is to obtain insight about factors influencing the work of the diabetes educator. Method The 2017 NPS was comprised of 100 questions covering diabetes educator demographics, profile populations of people with diabetes, practice information, program accreditation, program curriculum, staffing, education delivery methods, data collection, and reporting. The basic survey consisted of 22 questions using branch logic, from which respondents were then directed to questions tailored to their particular practice setting, enabling them to answer only a relevant subset of the remaining questions. The web-based survey was sent to approximately 32 000 individuals who were either members of the American Association of Diabetes Educators (AADE) or Certified Diabetes Educators (CDE) with the National Certification Board for Diabetes Educators (NCBDE) but not AADE members. Weekly reminder e-mails were sent to recipients who had not yet responded. The outreach efforts resulted in the survey being completed by 4696 individuals, a 17% response rate yielding 95% confidence that these responses are within ±5% accuracy. Results Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) continues to be a field dominated by women (95%). Diabetes educators represent a diverse health care profession, with educators indicating most commonly that their primary discipline is nursing (48%), nutrition (38%), and pharmacy (7%). When asked about credentials, 82.6% indicated that they held a CDE, 3.8% held the Board Certified-Advanced Diabetes Management (BC-ADM) credential, and 16.5% held neither the CDE nor the BC-ADM. Nearly 75% characterized their role as a diabetes educator as providing direct patient care. DSMES continued to be provided in a varied array of settings to educationally, socioeconomically, and racially diverse patient populations. DSMES was delivered using a number of different educational strategies. Diabetes educators have direct influence in care and services that people with diabetes receive. Conclusions The results of the 2017 NPS demonstrate that diabetes educators are meeting the needs of varied populations in various practice settings. They are working with individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, those at risk for diabetes, and women with gestational diabetes and are involved in recommending, implementing, and providing key referrals and recommendations for diabetes care, including insulin initiation, titration, medication adjustments, recommendations on devices, and technology. Identified areas for improvement include needs for increased racial and ethnic diversity in the workforce, recruiting young professionals, drawing practice approaches from related disciplines (eg, mental health and disability rehabilitation), and encouraging tracking of more areas of outcomes data. Diabetes educators are playing an increasingly central role within multidisciplinary care teams with people at risk for diabetes, those who have diabetes, and those with other chronic conditions.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. Methods The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. Results Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. Conclusion Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to review the literature for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (DSMES) to ensure the National Standards for DSMES (Standards) align with current evidence-based practices and utilization trends. Methods The 10 Standards were divided among 20 interdisciplinary workgroup members. Members searched the current research for diabetes education and support, behavioral health, clinical, health care environment, technical, reimbursement, and business practice for the strongest evidence that guided the Standards revision. Results Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support facilitates the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage their condition on an ongoing basis. The evidence indicates that health care providers and people affected by diabetes are embracing technology, and this is having a positive impact of DSMES access, utilization, and outcomes. Conclusion Quality DSMES continues to be a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. The DSMES services must be individualized and guided by the concerns, preferences, and needs of the person affected by diabetes. Even with the abundance of evidence supporting the benefits of DSMES, it continues to be underutilized, but as with other health care services, technology is changing the way DSMES is delivered and utilized with positive outcomes.

Achievement of Weight Loss and Other Requirements of the Diabetes Prevention and Recognition Program: A National Diabetes Prevention Program Network Based on Nationally Certified Diabetes Self-management Education Programs.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is (1) to describe the use of the American Association of Diabetes Educators' (AADE's) model of implementation of the National Diabetes Prevention Program through nationally certified diabetes self-management education (DSME) programs and (2) to report the aggregated program outcomes as defined by the Diabetes Prevention and Recognition Program standards of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). METHODS: In 2012, the AADE worked with the CDC to select 30 certified DSME programs for National Diabetes Prevention Program delivery. For the following 3 years, the AADE continued to work with 25 of the 30 original programs. Results for all CDC recognition standards have been collected from these 25 programs and analyzed as aggregated data over the course of 36 months. RESULTS: At the end of the full-year program, average percentage body weight loss for participants across all 25 programs exceeded the CDC's minimum requirement of 5% weight loss. All programs on average met the CDC requirements for program attendance. CONCLUSION: Increasing access to the National Diabetes Prevention Program, through an array of networks, including certified DSME programs, will better ensure that people are able to engage in an effective approach to reducing their risk of diabetes.

National Role Delineation Study of the Board Certification for Advanced Diabetes Management: Evidence-Based Support of the New Test Content Outline.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this comprehensive role delineation study of the Board Certification for Advanced Diabetes Management (BC-ADM) examination was to ensure its content validity. METHOD: The comprehensive role delineation study was conducted in 3 phases. In the first phase, a panel of 12 currently credentialed BC-ADM subject matter experts produced a list of practice domains, a unique set of content subdomains for each, and a series of knowledge statements for every subdomain. In the second phase, a validation study survey consisting of 3 sections was created. The first section was to rate each subdomain on three factors: criticality, frequency, and point in career at which knowledge is first used. The second section asked respondents to estimate the percentage of the examination to dedicate to the four domains. The third section captured demographic information of the respondents. A total of 667 BC-ADMs and 18 physicians were invited to take the survey. In the third phase, the subject matter expert panel analyzed the survey results and determined the weight that the domains and subdomains should have on the 150-item BC-ADM examination. RESULTS: Final domain weights and the corresponding number of items for the BC-ADM examination are provided in this report; these constitute the BC-ADM examination blueprint. CONCLUSIONS: The national role delineation study reported here for the BC-ADM examination ensures that it is reflective of the current practice and required knowledge of the advanced diabetes manager.