Dataset Information

Design of a randomized controlled trial of digital health and community health worker support for diabetes management among low-income patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Insulin-dependent diabetes is a challenging disease to manage and involves complex behaviors, such as self-monitoring of blood glucose. This can be especially challenging in the face of socioeconomic barriers and in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital health self-monitoring interventions and community health worker support are promising and complementary best practices for improving diabetes-related health behaviors and outcomes. Yet, these strategies have not been tested in combination. This protocol paper describes the rationale and design of a trial that measures the combined effect of digital health and community health worker support on glucose self-monitoring and glycosylated hemoglobin.

Methods

The study population was uninsured or publicly insured; lived in high-poverty, urban neighborhoods; and had poorly controlled diabetes mellitus with insulin dependence. The study consisted of three arms: usual diabetes care; digital health self-monitoring; or combined digital health and community health worker support. The primary outcome was adherence to blood glucose self-monitoring. The exploratory outcome was change in glycosylated hemoglobin.

Conclusion

The design of this trial was grounded in social justice and community engagement. The study protocols were designed in collaboration with frontline community health workers, the study aim was explicit about furthering knowledge useful for advancing health equity, and the population was focused on low-income people. This trial will advance knowledge of whether combining digital health and community health worker interventions can improve glucose self-monitoring and diabetes-related outcomes in a high-risk population.

SUBMITTER: Harte R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8688867 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Community-based peer and community health worker-led diabetes self-management programs (COMP-DSMP) can benefit diabetes care, but the supporting evidence has been inadequately assessed. This systematic review explores the nature of COMP-DSMP in low- and middle-income countries' (LMIC) primary care settings and evaluates implementation strategies and diabetes-related health outcomes. METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed-MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL PsycINFO Database, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Clinicaltrials.gov, Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR), and HINARI (Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative) for studies that evaluated a COMP-DSMP in adults with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes in World Bank-defined LMIC from January 2000 to December 2019. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials with at least 3 months follow-up and reporting on a behavioural, a primary psychological, and/or a clinical outcome were included. Implementation strategies were analysed using the standardised implementation framework by Proctor et al. Heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes, the scale of measurements, and measurement times precluded meta-analysis; thus, a narrative description of studies is provided. RESULTS:Of the 702 records identified, eleven studies with 6090 participants were included. COMP-DSMPs were inconsistently associated with improvements in clinical, behavioural, and psychological outcomes. Many of the included studies were evaluated as being of low quality, most had a substantial risk of bias, and there was a significant heterogeneity of the intervention characteristics (for example, peer definition, selection, recruitment, training and type, dose, and duration of delivered intervention), such that generalisation was not possible. CONCLUSIONS:The level of evidence of this systematic review was considered low according to the GRADE criteria. The existing evidence however does show some improvements in outcomes. We recommend ongoing, but well-designed studies using a framework such as the MRC framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions to inform the evidence base on the contribution of COMP-DSMP in LMIC.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Community health workers (CHWs) are increasingly being tasked to prevent and manage cardiovascular disease (CVD) and its risk factors in underserved populations in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs); however, little is known about the required training necessary for them to accomplish their role. This review aimed to evaluate the training of CHWs for the prevention and management of CVD and its risk factors in LMICs. METHODS:A search strategy was developed in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and five electronic databases (Medline, Global Health, ERIC, EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies published until December 2016 on the training of CHWs for prevention or control of CVD and its risk factors in LMICs. Study characteristics were extracted using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and quality assessed using Effective Public Health Practice Project's Quality Assessment Tool. The search, data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers. RESULTS:The search generated 928 articles of which 8 were included in the review. One study was a randomised controlled trial, while the remaining were before-after intervention studies. The training methods included classroom lectures, interactive lessons, e-learning and online support and group discussions or a mix of two or more. All the studies showed improved knowledge level post-training, and two studies demonstrated knowledge retention 6 months after the intervention. CONCLUSION:The results of the eight included studies suggest that CHWs can be trained effectively for CVD prevention and management. However, the effectiveness of CHW trainings would likely vary depending on context given the differences between studies (eg, CHW demographics, settings and training programmes) and the weak quality of six of the eight studies. Well-conducted mixed-methods studies are needed to provide reliable evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of training programmes for CHWs.

Project description:Health care centers serving low-income communities have scarce resources to support medication decision making among patients with poorly controlled diabetes.To compare outcomes between community health worker use of a tailored, interactive, Web-based, tablet computer-delivered tool (iDecide) and use of print educational materials.Randomized, 2-group trial conducted from 2011 to 2013 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01427660).Community health center in Detroit, Michigan, serving a Latino and African American low-income population.188 adults with a hemoglobin A1c value greater than 7.5% (55%) or those who reported questions, concerns, or difficulty taking diabetes medications.Participants were randomly assigned to receive a 1- to 2-hour session with a community health worker who used iDecide or printed educational materials and 2 follow-up calls.Primary outcomes were changes in knowledge about antihyperglycemic medications, patient-reported medication decisional conflict, and satisfaction with antihyperglycemic medication information. Also examined were changes in diabetes distress, self-efficacy, medication adherence, and hemoglobin A1c values.Ninety-four percent of participants completed 3-month follow-up. Both groups improved across most measures. iDecide participants reported greater improvements in satisfaction with medication information (helpfulness, P = 0.007; clarity, P = 0.03) and in diabetes distress compared with the print materials group (P < 0.001). The other outcomes did not differ between the groups.The study was conducted at 1 health center during a short period. The community health workers were experienced in behavioral counseling, thereby possibly mitigating the need for additional support tools.Most outcomes were similarly improved among participants receiving both types of decision-making support for diabetes medication. Longer-term evaluations are necessary to determine whether the greater improvements in satisfaction with medication information and diabetes distress achieved in the iDecide group at 3 months translate into better longer-term diabetes outcomes.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Project description:ImportanceAddressing the social determinants of health has been difficult for health systems to operationalize.ObjectiveTo assess a standardized intervention, Individualized Management for Patient-Centered Targets (IMPaCT), delivered by community health workers (CHWs) across 3 health systems.Design, setting, and participantsThis 2-armed, single-blind, multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited patients from 3 primary care facilities in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, between January 28, 2015, and March 28, 2016. Patients who resided in a high-poverty zip code, were uninsured or publicly insured, and who had a diagnosis for 2 or more chronic diseases were recruited, and patients were randomized to either the CHW intervention or the control arm (goal setting only). Follow-up assessments were conducted at 6 and 9 months after enrollment. Data were analyzed using an intention-to-treat approach from June 2017 to March 2018.InterventionParticipants set a chronic disease management goal with their primary care physician; those randomized to the CHW intervention received 6 months of tailored support.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in self-rated physical health. The secondary outcomes were self-rated mental health, chronic disease control, patient activation, patient-reported quality of primary care, and all-cause hospitalization.ResultsOf the 592 participants, 370 (62.5%) were female, with a mean (SD) age of 52.6 (11.1) years. Participants in both arms had similar improvements in self-rated physical health (mean [SD], 1.8 [11.2] vs 1.6 [9.9]; P = .89). Patients in the intervention group were more likely to report the highest quality of care (odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.4; risk difference [RD], 0.12; P < .001) and spent fewer total days in the hospital at 6 months (155 days vs 345 days; absolute event rate reduction, 69%) and 9 months (300 days vs 471 days; absolute event rate reduction, 65%). This reduction was driven by a shorter average length of stay (difference, -3.1 days; 95% CI, -6.33 to 0.22; P = .06) and a lower mean number of hospitalizations (difference, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.0; P = .07) among patients who were hospitalized. Patients in the intervention group had a lower odds of repeat hospitalizations (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9; RD, -0.24; P = .02), including 30-day readmissions (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.9; RD, -0.17; P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceA standardized intervention did not improve self-rated health but did improve the patient-perceived quality of care while reducing hospitalizations, suggesting that health systems may use a standardized intervention to address the social determinants of health.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02347787.

Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 has significantly affected community health workers' (CHWs) performance as they are expected to perform pandemic-related tasks along with routine essential healthcare services. A plausible way to optimise CHWs' functioning during this pandemic is to couple the efforts of CHWs with digital tools. So far, no systematic evidence is available on the use of digital health interventions to support CHWs in low-middle-income countries (LMICs) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The article describes a protocol for a scoping review of primary research studies that aim to map evidence on the use of unique digital health interventions to support CHWs during COVID-19 in LMICs.Methods and analysisOur methodology has been adapted from scoping review guidelines provided by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al. and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Our search strategy has been developed for the following four main electronic databases: Excerpta Medica Database, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Google Scholar and reference tracking will be used for supplementary searches. Each article will be screened against eligibility criteria by two independent researchers at the title and abstract and full-text level. The review will include studies that targeted digital health interventions at CHWs' level to provide support in delivering COVID-19-related and other essential healthcare services. A date limit of 31 December 2019 to the present date will be placed on the search and English language articles will be included.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required, as primary data will not be collected in this study. The results from our scoping review will provide valuable insight into the use of digital health interventions to optimise CHWs' functioning and will reveal current knowledge gaps in research. The results will be disseminated through journal publications and conference presentations.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify which primary healthcare (PHC) principles are reflected in the implementation of national community health worker (CHW) programmes and how they may contribute to the outcomes of these programmes in the context of low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).DesignScoping review.Data sourcesA systematic search was conducted through PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus databases.Eligibility criteriaThe review considered published primary studies on national programmes, projects or initiatives using the services of CHWs in LMICs focused on maternal and child health. We included only English language studies. Excluded were programmes operated by non-government organisations, study protocols, reviews, commentaries, opinion papers, editorials and conference proceedings.Data extraction and synthesisWe reviewed the application of four PHC principles (universal health coverage, community participation, intersectoral coordination and appropriateness) in the CHW programme's objectives, implementation and stated outcomes. Data extraction was undertaken systematically in an excel spreadsheet while the findings were synthesised in a narrative manner. The quality appraisal of the selected studies was not performed in this scoping review.ResultsFrom 1280 papers published between 1983 and 2019, 26 met the inclusion criteria. These 26 papers included 14 CHW programmes from 13 LMICs. Universal health coverage and community participation were the two commonly reported PHC principles, while intersectoral coordination was generally missing. Similarly, the cultural acceptability aspect of the principle of appropriateness was present in all programmes as these programmes select CHWs from within the communities. Other aspects, particularly effectiveness, were not evident.ConclusionThe implementation of PHC principles across national CHW programmes in LMICs is patchy. For comprehensiveness and improved health outcomes, programmes need to incorporate all attributes of PHC principles. Future research may focus on how to incorporate more attributes of PHC principles while implementing national CHW programmes in LMICs. Better documentation and publications of CHW programme implementation are also needed.