Search

OBJECTIVES: Continuity of care measures are widely used to evaluate the quality of health care delivery, but which visits are included vary across studies. Our objective was to determine how the provider specialties included affect continuity values, year-to-year stability, and association with emergency department (ED) visits. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of Alabama Medicaid administrative data. METHODS: We included beneficiaries with diabetes who had at least 3 outpatient visits in each of 2018 and 2019 (N = 9578). We defined 3 provider groupings: all providers, diabetes-broad (primary care, cardiology, neurology, endocrinology, ophthalmology, nephrology, and psychiatry), and diabetes-narrow (primary care and endocrinology). Continuity of care was calculated using the Continuity of Care Index (COCI) for each provider grouping. We compared correlation between measures and from year to year using Spearman correlations, and we used multivariable logistic regression to determine association with ED visits. RESULTS: The mean COCI was 0.54 using visits with all providers, 0.64 with diabetes-broad providers, and 0.83 with diabetes-narrow providers. COCI with diabetes-narrow providers was moderately correlated with the broader sets of providers (Spearman ρ, 0.52-0.65). Comparing each participant's COCI in 2018 with that in 2019, the mean intraperson difference was similar (0.16-0.22), and correlation was moderate (Spearman ρ, 0.41-0.47) for each measure. COCI had similar weak association with ED visits using each provider grouping (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99 for each 0.1-unit difference in COCI). CONCLUSIONS: Continuity values differed substantially depending on which provider specialties were included. The importance of this variation is uncertain, as continuity was weakly associated with ED visits using each of the measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Diabetes distress affects approximately 36% of adults with diabetes and is associated with worse diabetes self‐management and poor glycaemic control. We characterized participants' diabetes distress and studied the relationship between social support and diabetes distress. Methods: In this cross‐sectional study, we surveyed a population‐based sample of adults with type 2 diabetes covered by Alabama Medicaid. We used the Diabetes Distress Scale assessing emotional burden, physician‐related, regimen‐related and interpersonal distress. We assessed participants' level of diabetes‐specific social support and satisfaction with this support, categorized as low or moderate–high. We performed multivariable logistic regression of diabetes distress by level of and satisfaction with social support, adjusting for demographics, disease severity, self‐efficacy and depressive symptoms. Results: In all, 1147 individuals participated; 73% were women, 41% White, 58% Black and 3% Hispanic. Low level of or satisfaction with social support was reported by 11% of participants; 7% of participants had severe diabetes distress. Participants with low satisfaction with social support were statistically significantly more likely to have severe diabetes distress than those with moderate–high satisfaction, adjusted odds ratio 2.43 (95% CI 1.30, 4.54). Conclusions: Interventions addressing diabetes distress in adults with type 2 diabetes may benefit from a focus on improving diabetes‐specific social support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Peer support has been shown to improve diabetes self-management and control, but no standard exists to link peer support interventions to clinical care. Objective: To compare a community-based diabetes self-management education (DSME) plus mobile health (mHealth)–enhanced peer support intervention to community-based diabetes self-management education (DSME) alone for African American adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Design: A randomized controlled trial. Participants: African American adults, age > 19 years, receiving care within a safety-net healthcare system in Jefferson County, Alabama, with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and a hemoglobin A1c (A1C) ≥ 7.5%. Interventions: Participants in the intervention group received community-based diabetes self-management education (DSME) plus 6 months of mHealth-enhanced peer support, including 12 weekly phone calls, then 3 monthly calls from community health workers, who used a novel web application to communicate with participants' healthcare teams. In the control group, participants received community-based DSME alone. Main Measures: The primary outcome was A1C; secondary outcomes included diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, self-efficacy or confidence in their ability to manage diabetes, and social support. We used mixed models repeated measures analyses to assess for between-arm differences and baseline to follow-up changes. Key Results: Of 120 participants randomized, 97 completed the study. Participants in intervention and control groups experienced clinically meaningful reduction in A1C, 10.1 (SD 1.7) to 9.6 (SD 1.9) and 9.8 (SD 1.7) to 9.1 (SD 1.9) respectively, p = 0.004. Participants in the intervention group experienced a significantly larger reduction in diabetes distress compared to the control, 2.7 (SD 1.2) to 2.1 (1.0) versus 2.6 (SD 1.1) to 2.3 (SD 1.0) p = 0.041. Conclusions: Community-based DSME with and without peer support led to improved glycemic control. Peer support linked to clinical care led to a larger reduction in diabetes distress, which has important implications for the overall wellbeing of adults with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose High-quality medication reconciliation reduces medication discrepancies, but smaller hospitals serving rural patients may have difficulty implementing this because of limited resources. We sought to adapt and implement an evidence-based toolkit of best practices for medication reconciliation in smaller hospitals, evaluate the effect on unintentional medication discrepancies, and assess facilitators and barriers to implementation. Methods We conducted a 2-year mentored-implementation quality improvement feasibility study in 3 Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals serving rural patients. The primary outcome was unintentional medication discrepancies per medication per patient, determined by comparing the "gold standard" preadmission medication history to the documented preadmission medication list and admission and discharge orders. Results In total, 797 patients were included; their average age was 68.7 years, 94.4% were male, and they were prescribed an average of 9.6 medications. Sites 2 and 3 implemented toolkit interventions, including clarifying roles among clinical personnel, educating providers on taking a best possible medication history, and hiring pharmacy professionals to obtain a best possible medication history and perform discharge medication reconciliation. Site 1 did not implement an intervention. Discrepancies improved in intervention patients compared with controls at Site 3 (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45–0.67) but increased in intervention patients compared with controls at Site 2 (adjusted IRR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08–1.36). Conclusions An evidence-based toolkit for medication reconciliation adapted to the VA setting was adopted in 2 of 3 small, rural, resource-limited hospitals, resulting in both reduced and increased unintentional medication discrepancies. We highlight facilitators and barriers to implementing evidence-based medication reconciliation in smaller hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is unknown whether observational studies evaluating the association between antidiabetic medications and mortality adequately account for frailty. Our objectives were to evaluate if frailty was a potential confounder in the relationship between antidiabetic medication regimen and mortality and how well administrative and clinical electronic health record (EHR) data account for frailty.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single Veterans Health Administration (VHA) healthcare system of 500 hospitalizations-the majority due to heart failure-of Veterans who received regular VHA care and initiated type 2 diabetes treatment from 2001 to 2008. We measured frailty using a modified frailty index (FI, >0.21 frail). We obtained antidiabetic medication regimen and time-to-death from administrative sources. We compared FI among patients on different antidiabetic regimens. Stepwise Cox proportional hazards regression estimated time-to-death by demographic, administrative, clinical EHR, and FI data.Results: Median FI was 0.22 (interquartile range 0.18, 0.27). Frailty differed across antidiabetic regimens (p < .001). An FI increase of 0.05 was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.32, 1.60). Cox proportional hazards model for time-to-death including demographic, administrative, and clinical EHR data had a c-statistic of 0.70; adding FI showed marginal improvement (c-statistic 0.72).Conclusions: Frailty was associated with antidiabetic regimen and death, and may confound that relationship. Demographic, administrative, and clinical EHR data, commonly used to balance differences among exposure groups, performed moderately well in assessing risk of death, with minimal gain from adding frailty. Study design and analytic techniques can help minimize potential confounding by frailty in observational studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. Results of a study to identify medication history technician (MHT) programs within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and to evaluate the personnel, structure, and scope of such programs are reported. Methods. Specially trained pharmacy technicians can take accurate patient medication histories and contribute to the medication reconciliation process. An environmental scan of MHT programs within VHA was conducted via an email query of pharmacy personnel. Semistructured interviews of personnel at each responding site (an MHT, a pharmacist, or both) were conducted. Results. Ten VHA sites had existing MHT programs; the earliest was initiated in 2010. Sites employed from 1 to 4 MHTs, who most commonly worked in the inpatient setting (7 sites). At most sites (9), MHTs obtained a "best possible medication history" through systematic collection of medication information using 2 reliable sources, such as patients, caregivers, and medical records. Survey respondents at all sites reported benefits of MHT programs, including dedicated time to obtain medication histories, allowing for more effective use of pharmacists' time. Six sites were eager to increase the reach of their programs. MHT training, oversight, and quality assurance varied across the sites. The survey results indicated that there are opportunities nationally--within and outside VHA--to develop standardized training, competency assessments, and quality assurance measures for MHT programs. Conclusion. Ten VHA sites with MHT programs were identified. MHTs most commonly worked in inpatient settings as part of admission medication reconciliation processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Depression is common in patients with type 2 diabetes and associated with poor diabetes-related outcomes. We evaluated the factors associated with antidepressant use in a low-income, racially and ethnically diverse sample of patients with type 2 diabetes.Research Design and Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of baseline data from participants in a cluster randomized trial evaluating a health literacy intervention for diabetes care in safety net clinics. Depressive symptoms were measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D); antidepressant use was abstracted from medication lists. Multivariable mixed effects logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between antidepressant use and race/ethnicity adjusting for depressive symptoms, age, gender, income, and health literacy.Results: Of 403 participants, 58% were non-Hispanic White, 18% were non-Hispanic Black, and 24% were Hispanic. Median age was 51 years old; 60% were female, 52% of participants had a positive screen for depression, and 18% were on antidepressants. Black and Hispanic participants were significantly less likely to be on an antidepressant compared with white participants, adjusted odds ratios 0.31(95% CI: 0.12 to 0.80) and 0.26 (95% CI: 0.10 to 0.74), respectively.Conclusions: In this vulnerable population with type 2 diabetes, we found a high prevalence of depressive symptoms, and a small proportion of participants were on an antidepressant. Black and Hispanic participants were significantly less likely to be treated with an antidepressant. Our findings suggest depression may be inadequately treated in low-income, uninsured patients with type 2 diabetes, especially racial and ethnic minorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether adding basal insulin to metformin in adults with early type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) would increase emotional distress relative to other treatments. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) of adults with T2DM of <10 years' duration, HbA1c 6.8–8.5%, and taking metformin monotherapy randomly assigned participants to add insulin glargine U-100, sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor sitagliptin. The Emotional Distress Substudy enrolled 1,739 GRADE participants (mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, 32% female, 56% non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic) and assessed diabetes distress and depressive symptoms every 6 months. Analyses examined differences at 1 year and over the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Across treatments, diabetes distress (−0.24, P < 0.0001) and depressive symptoms (−0.67, P < 0.0001) decreased over 1 year. Diabetes distress was lower at 1 year for the glargine group than for the other groups combined (−0.10, P = 0.002). Diabetes distress was also lower for liraglutide than for glimepiride or sitagliptin (−0.10, P = 0.008). Over the 3-year follow-up, there were no significant group differences in total diabetes distress; interpersonal diabetes distress remained lower for those assigned to liraglutide. No significant differences were observed for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expectations, this randomized trial found no evidence for a deleterious effect of basal insulin on emotional distress. Glargine lowered diabetes distress modestly at 1 year rather than increasing it. Liraglutide also reduced diabetes distress at 1 year. Results can inform treatment decisions for adults with early T2DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: We examined longitudinal associations between emotional distress (specifically, depressive symptoms and diabetes distress) and medication adherence in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in adults with relatively recent-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Emotional Distress Substudy assessed medication adherence, depressive symptoms, and diabetes distress in 1,739 GRADE participants via self-completed questionnaires administered biannually up to 3 years. We examined baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress as predictors of medication adherence over 36 months. Bidirectional visit-to-visit relationships were also examined. Treatment satisfaction, beliefs about medication, diabetes care self-efficacy, and perceived control over diabetes were evaluated as mediators of longitudinal associations. RESULTS: At baseline, mean ± SD age of participants (56% of whom were White, 17% Hispanic/Latino, 18% Black, and 66% male) was 58.0 ± 10.2 years, diabetes duration 4.2 ± 2.8 years, HbA1c 7.5% ± 0.5%, and medication adherence 89.9% ± 11.1%. Higher baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress were independently associated with lower adherence over 36 months (P < 0.001). Higher depressive symptoms and diabetes distress at one visit predicted lower adherence at the subsequent 6-month visit (P < 0.0001) but not vice versa. Treatment assignment did not moderate relationships. Patient-reported concerns about diabetes medications mediated the largest percentage (11.9%–15.5%) of the longitudinal link between emotional distress and adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms and diabetes distress both predict lower adherence to glucose-lowering medications over time among adults with T2DM. Addressing emotional distress and concerns about anticipated negative effects of taking these treatments may be important to support diabetes treatment adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether baseline levels of depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress are associated with glycemic control in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing the metabolic effects of four common glucose-lowering medications when combined with metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The primary and secondary outcomes were defined as an HbA1c value ≥7%, subsequently confirmed, and an HbA1c value >7.5%, subsequently confirmed, respectively. Separate Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between baseline levels of each exposure of interest (depressive symptoms measured with the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire and diabetes distress measured with the Diabetes Distress Scale) and the subsequent risk of metabolic outcomes. RESULTS: This substudy included 1,739 participants (56% of whom were non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic, and 68% male; mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, diabetes duration 4.2 [2.8] years, and HbA1c 7.5% [0.48%]). A total of 1,157 participants reached the primary outcome, with time to event of 2.1 years on average, while 738 participants reached the secondary outcome at 3 years on average. With adjustment for sex, race/ethnicity, treatment group, baseline age, duration of T2DM, BMI, and HbA1c, there were no significant associations between the depressive symptoms or diabetes distress and the subsequent risk of the primary or secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings suggest that, at least for individuals with diabetes of relatively short duration, baseline levels of emotional distress are not associated with glycemic control over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diabetes distress affects up to 45% of adults with diabetes and is associated with reduced treatment adherence and poor glycemic control. We evaluated diabetes distress and the relationship between social support and diabetes distress in adults with Medicaid. Methods: We surveyed a population-based sample of adults, aged 19 to 64 years old, covered by Alabama Medicaid, and diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes distress was measured with the 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) assessing emotional burden, physician-related distress, regimen-related distress, and interpersonal distress. A score of <2 indicates little/no distress, 2-2.9 moderate distress, and ≥3 high distress. Social support was assessed by the question "How much support do you get for dealing with your diabetes?" and responses were categorized as low, moderate, or high social support. We performed multivariate logistic regression of diabetes distress by social support, adjusting for demographics, disease severity, self-efficacy, and depressive symptoms. Results: In total, 541 individuals participated; 72% were female, 40% white, 58% black, and 3% Hispanic. Mean diabetes distress score was 1.7 (SD 0.88); 72.8% of participants had little/no diabetes distress, 16.8% moderate distress, and 10.4% high distress. Most participants (56.9%) reported high social support, but 13.5% reported low and 29.6% moderate social support. Participants who reported low and moderate social support were significantly more likely to have high diabetes distress (≥3) than those who reported high social support, adjusted odds ratio 14.3 (95% CI 5.2, 39.1) and 4.2 (95% CI 1.6, 10.7), respectively. This relationship was present for each diabetes distress domain, with particularly strong relationships between low social support and high interpersonal and regimen-related distress. Conclusions: Interventions seeking to reduce diabetes distress in adults with type 2 diabetes may benefit from a focus on improving social support. Disclosure: C.A. Presley: None. F.L. Mondesir: None. A.A. Agne: None. K.R. Riggs: None. M. Pisu: None. E.B. Levitan: Consultant; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Research Support; Self; Amgen Inc. J.M. Bronstein: None. A. Cherrington: None. Funding: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient–provider communication is modifiable and is linked to diabetes outcomes. The association of communication quality with medical mistrust is unknown. We examined these factors within the context of a low-literacy/numeracy-focused intervention to improve diabetes care, using baseline data from diverse patients enrolled in a randomized trial of a health communication intervention. Demographics, measures of health communication (Communication Assessment Tool [CAT], Interpersonal Processes of Care survey [IPC-18]), health literacy (Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults), depression, medical mistrust, and glycemic control were ascertained. Adjusted proportional odds models were used to test the association of mistrust with patient-reported communication quality. The interaction effect of health literacy on mistrust and communication quality was also assessed. A total of 410 patients were analyzed. High levels of mistrust were observed. In multivariable modeling, patients with higher mistrust had lower adjusted odds of reporting a higher CAT score (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.52, 0.86],p = .003) and higher scores on the Communication (AOR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.55, 0.88],p = .008), Decided Together (AOR = 0.74, 95% CI [0.59, 0.93],p = .02), and Interpersonal Style (AOR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.53, 0.90],p = .015) subscales of the IPC-18. We observed evidence of an interaction effect of health literacy for the association between mistrust and the Decided Together subscale of the IPC-18 such that patients with higher mistrust and lower literacy perceived worse communication relative to mistrustful patients with higher literacy. In conclusion, medical mistrust was associated with poorer communication with providers in this public health setting. Patients’ health literacy level may vary the effect of mistrust on interactional aspects of communication. Providers should consider the impact of mistrust on communication with vulnerable diabetes populations and focus efforts on mitigating its influence. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

People with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We examined depressive symptoms (DS) and diabetes distress (DD) in relation to the estimated 10-year risk of CVD in adults with T2DM enrolled in the GRADE Emotional Distress Substudy. Linear regression models examined the associations of baseline DS and DD with estimated 10-year risk of CVD using the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, diabetes duration, diabetes-related complications, and HbA1c. A total of 1,605 GRADE participants were included: 54% Non-Latino (NL) White, 18% Latino, 19% NL-Black, 66% male, mean age 57.5 (SD = 10.25) years, diabetes duration 4.2 (SD = 2.8) years, and HbA1c 7.5% (SD = 0.5%). After incorporating covariates, only DS, especially cognitive-affective symptoms, were associated with ASCVD risk (estimate = 0.15 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.025], p = 0.006). Higher DS remained significantly associated with higher ASCVD risk when adding DD to covariates (estimate = 0.19 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.30], p = 0.002). DD was not associated with ASCVD risk when accounting for covariates. Depressive symptoms, particularly cognitive-affective symptoms, are associated with increased 10-year predicted ASCVD risk among adults with early T2DM. Diabetes distress is not significantly associated with the predicted ASCVD risk when accounting for covariates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe patterns of care use for adult Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes and the association between primary care utilization and Ambulatory Care Sensitive (ACS) diabetes hospitalizations. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzes Alabama Medicaid claims data from January 2010 to April 2018 for 52,549 covered adults ages 19 to 64 with diabetes. Individuals were characterized by demographics, comorbidities, and health care use including primary, specialty, mental health, pharmaceutical, laboratory and hospital care. Characteristics of those with and without any ACS diabetes hospitalization are reported. A set of 118,758 observations was created, pairing information on primary care use in one year with ACS hospitalizations in the following year. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the impact of primary care use in one year on the occurrence of an ACS hospitalization in the following year. Results: One third of the cohort had at least one ACS diabetes hospitalization over their observed periods; hospital users tended to have multiple ACS hospitalizations. Hospital users had more comorbidities and pharmaceutical and other types of care use than those with no ACS hospitalizations. Controlling for other types of care use, comorbidities and demographics, having a primary care visit in one year was significantly associated with a reduced likelihood of ACS hospitalization in the following year (adjusted odds ratio comparing 1-2 primary care visits versus none 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.85). Conclusions: Program and population health interventions that increase access to primary care can have a beneficial effect of reducing excess inpatient hospital use for Medicaid covered adults with diabetes. Disclosure: J.M. Bronstein: None. L. Huang: None. A.A. Agne: None. F.L. Mondesir: None. C.A. Presley: None. K.R. Riggs: None. M. Pisu: None. E.B. Levitan: Consultant; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Research Support; Self; Amgen Inc. A. Cherrington: None. Funding: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]