Search

Assessing the risk of common, complex diseases requires consideration of clinical risk factors as well as monogenic and polygenic risks, which in turn may be reflected in family history. Returning risks to individuals and providers may influence preventive care or use of prophylactic therapies for those individuals at high genetic risk.To enable integrated genetic risk assessment, the eMERGE (electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics) network is enrolling 25,000 diverse individuals in a prospective cohort study across 10 sites. The network developed methods to return cross-ancestry polygenic risk scores (PRS), monogenic risks, family history, and clinical risk assessments via a Genome Informed Risk Assessment (GIRA) report and will assess uptake of care recommendations after return of results.GIRAs include summary care recommendations for 11 conditions, education pages, and clinical laboratory reports. The return of high-risk GIRA to individuals and providers includes guidelines for care and lifestyle recommendations. Assembling the GIRA required infrastructure and workflows for ingesting and presenting content from multiple sources. Recruitment began in February 2022.Return of a novel report for communicating monogenic, polygenic, and family history based risk factors will inform the benefits of integrated genetic risk assessment for routine health care.

Problem/condition Diabetes self-management education (DSME) is a clinical practice intended to improve preventive practices and behaviors with a focus on decision-making, problem-solving, and self-care. The distribution and correlates of established DSME programs in nonmetropolitan counties across the United States have not been previously described, nor have the characteristics of the nonmetropolitan counties with DSME programs. Reporting period July 2016. Description of systems DSME programs recognized by the American Diabetes Association or accredited by the American Association of Diabetes Educators (i.e., active programs) as of July 2016 were shared with CDC by both organizations. The U.S. Census Bureau's census geocoder was used to identify the county of each DSME program site using documented addresses. County characteristic data originated from the U.S. Census Bureau, compiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service into the 2013 Atlas of Rural and Small-Town America data set. County levels of diagnosed diabetes prevalence and incidence, as well as the number of persons with diagnosed diabetes, were previously estimated by CDC. This report defined nonmetropolitan counties using the rural-urban continuum code from the 2013 Atlas of Rural and Small-Town America data set. This code included six nonmetropolitan categories of 1,976 urban and rural counties (62% of counties) adjacent to and nonadjacent to metropolitan counties. Results In 2016, a total of 1,065 DSME programs were located in 38% of the 1,976 nonmetropolitan counties; 62% of nonmetropolitan counties did not have a DSME program. The total number of DSME programs for nonmetropolitan counties with at least one DSME program ranged from 1 to 8, with an average of 1.4 programs. After adjusting for county-level characteristics, the odds of a nonmetropolitan county having at least one DSME program increased as the percentage insured increased (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-1.13), the percentage with a high school education or less decreased (AOR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.04-1.07), the unemployment rate decreased (AOR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.11-1.23), and the natural logarithm of the number of persons with diabetes increased (AOR = 3.63, 95% CI = 3.15-4.19). Interpretation In 2016, there were few DMSE programs in nonmetropolitan, socially disadvantaged counties in the United States. The number of persons with diabetes, percentage insured, percentage with a high school education or less, and the percentage unemployed were significantly associated with whether a DSME program was located in a nonmetropolitan county. Public health action Monitoring the distribution of DSME programs at the county level provides insight needed to strategically address rural disparities in diabetes care and outcomes. These findings provide information needed to assess lack of availability of DSME programs and to explore evidence-based strategies and innovative technologies to deliver DSME programs in underserved rural communities.

Introduction Diabetes imposes large health and financial burdens on Medicare beneficiaries. Type 2 diabetes can be prevented or delayed through lifestyle modification programs. In 2018, Medicare began to offer the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP), a lifestyle intervention, to eligible beneficiaries nationwide. The number of MDPP-eligible beneficiaries is not known, but this information is essential in efforts to expand the program and increase enrollment. This study aimed to estimate the number and spatial variation of MDPP-eligible Part B beneficiaries at the county level and by urban–rural classification. Methods Data from 2011–2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys and a survey-weighted logistic regression model were used to estimate proportions of prediabetes in the United States by sex, age, and race/ethnicity based on the MDPP eligibility criteria. The results from the predictive model were applied to 2015 Medicare Part B beneficiaries to estimate the number of MDPP-eligible beneficiaries. The National Center for Health Statistics’ Urban–Rural Classification Scheme for Counties from 2013 were used to define urban and rural categories. Results An estimated 5.2 million (95% CI = 3.5–7.0 million) Part B beneficiaries were eligible for the MDPP. By state, estimates ranged from 13,000 (95% CI = 8,500–18,000) in Alaska to 469,000 (95% CI = 296,000–641,000) in California. There were 2,149 counties with ≤1,000 eligible beneficiaries and 11 with >25,000. Consistent with demographic patterns, urban counties had more eligible beneficiaries than rural counties. Conclusions These estimates could be used to plan locations for new MDPPs and reach eligible Part B beneficiaries for enrollment.

We provide an overview of the comprehensive evaluation of State Public Health Actions to Prevent and Control Diabetes, Heart Disease, Obesity and Associated Risk Factors and Promote School Health (State Public Health Actions). State Public Health Actions is a program funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to support the statewide implementation of cross-cutting approaches to promote health and prevent and control chronic diseases. The evaluation addresses the relevance, quality, and impact of the program by using 4 components: a national evaluation, performance measures, state evaluations, and evaluation technical assistance to states. Challenges of the evaluation included assessing the extent to which the program contributed to changes in the outcomes of interest and the variability in the states’ capacity to conduct evaluations and track performance measures. Given the investment in implementing collaborative approaches at both the state and national level, achieving meaningful findings from the evaluation is critical.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a cooperative agreement with health departments in all 50 states and the District of Columbia to strengthen chronic disease prevention and management efforts through the implementation of evidence-based strategies, such as CDC's National Diabetes Prevention Program. The National Diabetes Prevention Program supports organizations to deliver the year-long lifestyle change program that has been proven to prevent or delay the onset of type 2 diabetes among those at high risk. This article describes activities, barriers, and facilitators reported by funded states during the first 3 years (2013-2015) of a 5-year funding cycle.