Search

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231743.].

IntroductionThe RAINBOW randomized clinical trial validated the efficacy of an integrated collaborative care intervention for obesity and depression in primary care, although the effect was modest. To inform intervention optimization, this study investigated within-treatment variability in participant engagement and progress.MethodsData were collected in 2014-2017 and analyzed post hoc in 2018. Cluster analysis evaluated patterns of change in weekly self-monitored weight from week 6 up to week 52 and depression scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) from up to 15 individual sessions during the 12-month intervention. Chi-square tests and ANOVA compared weight loss and depression outcomes objectively measured by blinded assessors to validate differences among categories of treatment engagement and progress defined based on cluster analysis results.ResultsAmong 204 intervention participants (50.9 [SD, 12.2] years, 71% female, 72% non-Hispanic White, BMI 36.7 [6.9], PHQ-9 14.1 [3.2]), 31% (n = 63) had poor engagement, on average completing self-monitored weight in ConclusionsParticipants demonstrating poor engagement or poor progress could be identified early during the intervention and were more likely to fail treatment at the end of the intervention. This insight could inform individualized and timely optimization to enhance treatment efficacy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov# NCT02246413.

Highly structured, intensive behavioral lifestyle interventions have been shown to be efficacious in research settings for type 2 diabetes management and weight loss. We sought to evaluate the benefit of participation in more limited counseling and/or education among individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes in more modest real-world clinical settings.Electronic Health Records of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients age 35-74 from a large ambulatory group practice were analyzed (n = 1,314). We examined participation in clinic-based lifestyle counseling/education and subsequent weight loss.Of the total cohort, 599 (45.6%) patients received counseling/education with (26.2%) and without (19.4%) medication, 298(22.7%) patients received a prescription for medication alone, and 417(31.7%) patients were only monitored. On average, those who participated in counseling/education attended 2.5 sessions (approximately 2-3 hours). The average weight loss of patients who received counseling/education alone during the follow-up period (up to three years post-exposure to participation) was 6.3 lbs. (3.3% of body weight), and, if received with medication prescription, 8.1 lbs. (4.0% of body weight) (all at P

Abstract Objective Evaluations of lifestyle modification interventions (LMIs), modeled after the Diabetes Prevention Program, have repeatedly shown a dose‐response relationship between session attendance and weight loss. Despite this, not all participants had “average” weight loss experiences. Nearly one‐third of LMI participants experienced unexpected, paradoxical outcomes (i.e., high attendance with little weight loss, and low attendance with clinically significant weight loss). Paradoxical weight‐loss outcomes were characterized based on session attendance among participants in a group‐based LMI in a real‐world healthcare setting. This group‐based LMI was delivered over 1 year to participants with the possibility of attending up to 25 sessions total. Methods LMI participants identified in 2010–2017 from electronic health records were characterized as having low (

Abstract Background It is increasingly recognized that policies have played a role in both alleviating and exacerbating the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been limited systematic evaluation of variation in U.S. local COVID-19-related policies. This study introduces the U.S. COVID-19 County Policy (UCCP) Database, whose objective is to systematically gather, characterize, and assess variation in U.S. county-level COVID-19-related policies. Methods In January-March 2021, we collected an initial wave of cross-sectional data from government and media websites for 171 counties in 7 states on 22 county-level COVID-19-related policies within 3 policy domains that are likely to affect health: (1) containment/closure, (2) economic support, and (3) public health. We characterized the presence and comprehensiveness of policies using univariate analyses. We also examined the correlation of policies with one another using bivariate Spearman’s correlations. Finally, we examined geographical variation in policies across and within states. Results There was substantial variation in the presence and comprehensiveness of county policies during January-March 2021. For containment and closure policies, the percent of counties with no restrictions ranged from 0% (for public events) to more than half for public transportation (67.8%), hair salons (52.6%), and religious gatherings (52.0%). For economic policies, 76.6% of counties had housing support, while 64.9% had utility relief. For public health policies, most were comprehensive, with 70.8% of counties having coordinated public information campaigns, and 66.7% requiring masks outside the home at all times. Correlations between containment and closure policies tended to be positive and moderate (i.e., coefficients 0.4–0.59). There was variation within and across states in the number and comprehensiveness of policies. Conclusions This study introduces the UCCP Database, presenting granular data on local governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We documented substantial variation within and across states on a wide range of policies at a single point in time. By making these data publicly available, this study supports future research that can leverage this database to examine how policies contributed to and continue to influence pandemic-related health and socioeconomic outcomes and disparities. The UCCP database is available online and will include additional time points for 2020–2021 and additional counties nationwide.

Abstract Background There is increased recognition in clinical settings of the importance of documenting, understanding, and addressing patients’ social determinants of health (SDOH) to improve health and address health inequities. This study evaluated a pilot of a standardized SDOH screening questionnaire and workflow in an ambulatory clinic within a large integrated health network in Northern California. Methods The pilot screened for SDOH needs using an 11-question Epic-compatible paper questionnaire assessing eight SDOH and health behavior domains: financial resource, transportation, stress, depression, intimate partner violence, social connections, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. Eligible patients for the pilot receiving a Medicare wellness, adult annual, or new patient visits during a five-week period (February-March, 2020), and a comparison group from the same time period in 2019 were identified. Sociodemographic data (age, sex, race/ethnicity, and payment type), visit type, length of visit, and responses to SDOH questions were extracted from electronic health records, and a staff experience survey was administered. The evaluation was guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Results Two-hundred eighty-nine patients were eligible for SDOH screening. Responsiveness by domain ranged from 55 to 67%, except for depression. Half of patients had at least one identified social need, the most common being stress (33%), physical activity (22%), alcohol (12%), and social connections (6%). Physical activity needs were identified more in females (81% vs. 19% in males, p

Abstract Background Today, approximately one in five United States adolescents age 12 to 19 years is obese and just over a third are either overweight or obese. This study examines how parents and peers influence diet and physical activity behaviors of older adolescents (14–18 years) with overweight or obesity to inform weight management interventions. Methods Adolescent participants included 14 to 18-year-olds with a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than the 85th percentile for their age and sex who were receiving care in a large healthcare system in Northern California. Adolescents and their parents participated in separate focus groups and interviews (if not able to attend focus groups) that were held at the same time in the same location. We used qualitative thematic analysis to identify common themes discussed in the adolescent and parent focus groups as well as paired analysis of adolescent-parent dyads. Results Participants included 26 adolescents and 27 parents. Adolescent participants were 14 to 18 years old. Half were female and the participants were almost evenly distributed across year in school. The majority self-identified as White (56%) and Asian (36%).Three themes were identified which included 1) parents overestimated how supportive they were compared to adolescents’ perception 2) parents and adolescents had different views regarding parental influence on adolescent diet and physical activity behaviors 3) parents and adolescents held similar views on peers’ influential role on lifestyle behaviors. Conclusion Parents’ and adolescents’ differing views suggest that alignment of parent and adolescent expectations and behaviors for supporting effective weight management could be incorporated into interventions.

Abstract Background Group-based Diabetes Prevention Programs (DPP), aligned with recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, promote clinically significant weight loss and reduce cardio-metabolic risks. Studies have examined implementation of the DPP in community settings, but less is known about its integration in healthcare systems. In 2010, a group-based DPP known as the Group Lifestyle Balance (GLB) was implemented within a large healthcare delivery system in Northern California, across three geographically distinct regional administration divisions of the organization within 12 state counties, with varying underlying socio-demographics. The regional divisions implemented the program independently, allowing for natural variation in its real-world integration. We leveraged this natural experiment to qualitatively assess the implementation of a DPP in this healthcare system and, especially, its fidelity to the original GLB curriculum and potential heterogeneity in implementation across clinics and regional divisions. Methods Using purposive sampling, we conducted semi-structured interviews with DPP lifestyle coaches. Data were analyzed using mixed-method techniques, guided by an implementation outcomes framework consisting of eight constructs: acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. Results We conducted 33 interviews at 20 clinics across the three regional administrative divisions. Consistencies in implementation of the program were found across regions in terms of satisfaction with the evidence base (acceptability), referral methods (adoption), eligibility criteria (fidelity), and strategies to increase retention and effectiveness (sustainability). Heterogeneity in implementation across regions were found in all categories, including: the number and frequency of sessions (fidelity); program branding (adoption); lifestyle coach training (adoption), and patient-facing cost (cost). Lifestyle coaches expressed differing attitudes about curriculum content (acceptability) and suitability of educational level (appropriateness). While difficulties with recruitment were common across regions (feasibility), strategies used to address these challenges differed (sustainability). Conclusions Variation exists in the implementation of the DPP within a large multi-site healthcare system, revealing a dynamic and important tension between retaining fidelity to the original program and tailoring the program to meet the local needs. Moreover, certain challenges across sites may represent opportunities for considering alternative implementation to anticipate these barriers. Further research is needed to explore how differences in implementation domains impact program effectiveness.

As the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic spreads throughout the United States, evidence is mounting that racial and ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are bearing a disproportionate burden of illness and death. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of COVID-19 patients at Sutter Health, a large integrated health system in northern California, to measure potential disparities. We used Sutter's integrated electronic health record to identify adults with suspected and confirmed COVID-19, and we used multivariable logistic regression to assess risk of hospitalization, adjusting for known risk factors, such as race/ethnicity, sex, age, health, and socioeconomic variables. We analyzed 1,052 confirmed cases of COVID-19 from the period January 1-April 8, 2020. Among our findings, we observed that compared with non-Hispanic white patients, non-Hispanic African American patients had 2.7 times the odds of hospitalization, after adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and income. We explore possible explanations for this, including societal factors that either result in barriers to timely access to care or create circumstances in which patients view delaying care as the most sensible option. Our study provides real-world evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in the presentation of COVID-19.