Dataset Information

Telehealth delivery of the diabetes prevention program to rural communities.

ABSTRACT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, State and Local Health Departments, and other organizations in the USA are working to increase population access to the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) lifestyle intervention. Delivering the DPP through telehealth videoconference may increase access to this intervention, particularly in rural communities. The purpose of this study was to compare participation, monitoring of diet and physical activity, and weight loss in participants receiving the intervention on-site and those participating virtually through telehealth. Beginning in 2008, Holy Rosary Healthcare collaborated with the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services to provide the DPP to participants on-site in one community and simultaneously through telehealth to participants in multiple other communities. From 2008 through 2015, 894 participants were enrolled in the program (29% at telehealth sites). The mean age of participants was 51.7 years and 84% were female. Overall, participants attended 14.4, 3.9, and 15.0 weekly core, post-core, and total sessions, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in number of intervention sessions attended by the telehealth or on-site participants. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean weight loss or reduction in BMI between the telehealth and the on-site groups. There also were no statistically significant differences in the percentage of telehealth or on-site participants who achieved ≥5% weight loss (56 vs. 57%) or the 7% weight loss goal (38 vs. 41%). Our findings suggest that participants receiving the DPP through telehealth have similar rates of participation and achieve similar weight loss as participants attending the program on-site.

SUBMITTER: Vadheim LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5526819 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the United States and places substantial burden on the health care system. Rural populations, especially women, have considerably higher rates of cardiovascular disease, influenced by poverty, environmental factors, access to health care, and social and cultural attitudes and norms.Methods/designThis community-based study will be a two-arm randomized controlled efficacy trial comparing a multi-level, community program (Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities) with a minimal intervention control program (Strong Hearts, Healthy Women). Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities was developed by integrating content from three evidence-based programs and was informed by extensive formative research (e.g. community assessments, focus groups, and key informant interviews). Classes will meet twice weekly for one hour for 24 weeks and focus on individual-level skill building and behavior change; social and civic engagement are also core programmatic elements. Strong Hearts, Healthy Women will meet monthly for hour-long sessions over the 24 weeks covering similar content in a general, condensed format. Overweight, sedentary women 40 years of age and older from rural, medically underserved communities (12 in Montana and 4 in New York) will be recruited; sites, pair-matched based on rurality, will be randomized to full or minimal intervention. Data will be collected at baseline, midpoint, intervention completion, and six-month, one-year, and eighteen months post-intervention. The primary outcome is change in body weight; secondary outcomes include physiologic, anthropometric, behavioral, and psychosocial variables. In the full intervention, engagement of participants' friends and family members in partnered activities and community events is an intervention target, hypothesizing that there will be a reciprocal influence of physical activity and diet behavior between participants and their social network. Family members and/or friends will be invited to complete baseline and follow-up questionnaires about their health behaviors and environment, height and weight, and attitudes and beliefs.DiscussionStrong Hearts, Healthy Communities aims to reduce cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality, improve quality of life, and reduce cardiovascular disease-related health care burden in underserved rural communities. If successful, the long-term goal is for the program to be nationally disseminated, providing a feasible model to reduce cardiovascular disease in rural settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02499731 Registered on July 1, 2015.

Project description:Background and objectiveOver 26 million older adults in the United States (US) have prediabetes, which is often a precursor to type 2 diabetes. The Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP) is an evidence-based, lifestyle program for older-adult Medicare beneficiaries to prevent progression to diabetes. However, the MDPP has been drastically underutilized. Telehealth delivery may be a promising strategy to increase the reach and impact of the MDPP, including for underserved populations. The objective of this narrative review is to explore the role of telehealth on the accessibility and effectiveness of diabetes prevention programs (DPPs) for older adults.MethodsWe searched the online databases of MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Academic Search Elite for studies that used telehealth to deliver DPPs to older adults through distance learning, i.e., live program delivery where participants join via phone- or video-conferencing. Relevant information from policy documents and related publications was also included.Key content and findingsThree themes emerged from the literature on telehealth delivery of DPPs for older adults (I) clinical effectiveness for weight loss, (II) feasibility and acceptability of this format; and (III) policy considerations to support greater public health impact. There is a growing body of recent evidence to suggest that older adults achieve a clinically meaningful amount of weight loss from participation in telehealth DPPs. The literature suggests that telehealth program delivery is feasible, and older adults find it acceptable, with some specific accommodations. Effectiveness and acceptability of telehealth interventions were also noted for older adults from rural, ethnically-diverse, and low-income groups. Policy considerations include adjustments in rulemaking by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to allow MDPP delivery via telehealth using distance learning, along with sufficient reimbursement rates.ConclusionsThe evidence indicates that delivery of the MDPP via telehealth is beneficial for increasing program reach and impact, including among underserved groups, as well as providing social support for older participants. Scalable delivery of the MDPP via telehealth is essential to make a national, population-level impact for older adults with prediabetes who receive Medicare benefits.

Project description:The largest and longest clinical trial of metformin for the prevention of diabetes is the Diabetes Prevention Program/Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPP/DPPOS). In this review, we summarise data from the DPP/DPPOS, focusing on metformin for diabetes prevention, as well as its long-term glycaemic and cardiometabolic effects and safety in people at high-risk of developing diabetes. The DPP (1996-2001) was a RCT of 3234 adults who, at baseline, were at high-risk of developing diabetes. Participants were assigned to masked placebo (n = 1082) or metformin (n = 1073) 850 mg twice daily, or intensive lifestyle intervention (n = 1079). The masked metformin/placebo intervention phase ended approximately 1 year ahead of schedule because of demonstrated efficacy. Primary outcome was reported at 2.8 years. At the end of the DPP, all participants were offered lifestyle education and 88% (n = 2776) of the surviving DPP cohort continued follow-up in the DPPOS. Participants originally assigned to metformin continued to receive metformin, unmasked. The DPP/DPPOS cohort has now been followed for over 15 years with prospective assessment of glycaemic, cardiometabolic, health economic and safety outcomes. After an average follow-up of 2.8 years, metformin reduced the incidence of diabetes by 31% compared with placebo, with a greater effect in those who were more obese, had a higher fasting glucose or a history of gestational diabetes. The DPPOS addressed the longer-term effects of metformin, showing a risk reduction of 18% over 10 and 15 years post-randomisation. Metformin treatment for diabetes prevention was estimated to be cost-saving. At 15 years, lack of progression to diabetes was associated with a 28% lower risk of microvascular complications across treatment arms, a reduction that was no different among treatment groups. Recent findings suggest metformin may reduce atherosclerosis development in men. Originally used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, metformin, now proven to prevent or delay diabetes, may serve as an important tool in battling the growing diabetes epidemic. Long-term follow-up, currently underway in the DPP/DPPOS, is now evaluating metformin's potential role, when started early in the spectrum of dysglycaemia, on later-stage comorbidities, including cardiovascular disease and cancer.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00038727 and NCT00004992.

Project description:PurposeWith emerging evidence indicating that systems-based approaches help optimise suicide prevention efforts, the National Suicide Prevention Trial sought to gather evidence on the appropriateness of these approaches to prevent suicide among at-risk populations, in regional and rural communities throughout Australia. The Tasmanian component of the Trial implemented the LifeSpan systems framework across three distinct rural areas with priority populations of men aged 40-64 and people 65 and over. The University of Tasmania's Centre for Rural Health undertook a local-level evaluation of the Trial.AimsTo explore key stakeholder perceptions of implementing a systems-based suicide prevention program in regional and rural communities in Tasmania, Australia.MethodThis study utilised qualitative methods to explore in depth, stakeholder perspectives. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with 46 participants, comprising Trial Site Working Group members (n = 25), Tasmania's Primary Health Network employees (n = 7), and other key stakeholders (n = 14). Approximately half of participants had a lived experience of suicide. Data were thematically analysed using NVivo.ResultsKey themes centred on factors impacting implementation of the Trial. These included how the Trial was established in Tasmania; Working Group governance structures and processes; communication and engagement processes; reaching priority population groups; the LifeSpan model and activity development; and the effectiveness, reach and sustainability of activities.DiscussionCommunities were acutely aware of the need to address suicide in their communities, with the Trial providing resources and coordination needed for community engagement and action. Strict adherence to the Lifespan model was challenging at the community level, with planning and time needed to focus on strategies influencing whole or multiple systems, for example health system changes, means restriction. Perceived limitations around implementation concerned varied community buy-in and stakeholder engagement and involvement, with lack of role clarity cited as a barrier to implementation within Working Groups. Barriers delivering activities to priority population groups centred around socio-cultural and technological factors, literacy, and levels of public awareness. Working Groups preferred activities which build on available capital and resources and which meet the perceived needs within the whole community. Approaches sought to increase awareness of suicide and its prevention, relationships and partnerships, and the lived experience capacity in Working Groups and communities.ConclusionStakeholder insights of implementing the National Suicide Prevention Trial in regional and rural Tasmanian from this study can help guide future community-based suicide prevention efforts, in similar geographic areas and with high-risk groups.

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundThe Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) was a randomized, controlled clinical trial. It demonstrated that among high-risk individuals with impaired glucose tolerance, diabetes incidence was reduced by 58 % with lifestyle intervention and 31 % with metformin compared to placebo. During the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS), all DPP participants were unmasked to their treatment assignments, the original lifestyle intervention group was offered additional lifestyle support, the metformin group continued metformin, and all three groups were offered a group-implemented lifestyle intervention. Over the 10 years of combined DPP/DPPOS follow-up, diabetes incidence was reduced by 34 % in the lifestyle group and 18 % in the metformin group compared to placebo. The purpose of this article is to review and synthesize analyses published by the DPP/DPPOS Research Group that have described the cost-effectiveness of diabetes prevention.MethodsWe describe the resource utilization and costs of the DPP and DPPOS interventions, the costs of non-intervention-related medical care, the impact of the interventions on diabetes progression and quality-of-life, and the cost-effectiveness of the interventions from health system and societal perspectives. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed with a 3-year time horizon using DPP data, a lifetime time horizon that simulated 3-year DPP data, and a 10-year time horizon using combined DPP/DPPOS data.ResultsAlthough more expensive than the placebo intervention, the greater costs of the lifestyle and metformin interventions were offset by reductions in the costs of nonintervention-related medical care. Every year after randomization, quality-of-life was better for participants in the lifestyle intervention compared to those in the metformin or placebo intervention. In both the simulated lifetime analysis and the 10-year within trial economic analysis, lifestyle and metformin were extremely cost-effective (that is, improved outcomes at a low incremental cost) or even cost-saving (that is, improved outcomes and reduced total costs) compared to the placebo intervention.ConclusionsThe implementation of diabetes prevention programs in high-risk individuals will result in important health benefits and represents a good value for money.Trial registrationNCT00004992 (DPP) and NCT00038727 (DPPOS).

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) diabetes prevention program (DPP) has formed the foundation for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) prevention efforts and lifestyle change modifications in multiple care settings. To our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial has verified the efficacy of a fully mobile version of CDC's diabetes prevention program (DPP). OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to investigate the long-term weight loss and glycemic efficacy of a mobile-delivered DPP compared with a control group receiving usual medical care. METHODS:Adults with prediabetes (N=202) were recruited from a clinic and randomized to either a mobile-delivered, coach-guided DPP (Noom) or a control group that received regular medical care including a paper-based DPP curriculum and no formal intervention. The intervention group learned how to use the Noom program, how to interact with their coach, and the importance of maintaining motivation. They had access to an interactive coach-to-participant interface and group messaging, daily challenges for behavior change, DPP-based education articles, food logging, and automated feedback. Primary outcomes included changes in weight and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Exploratory secondary outcomes included program engagement as a predictor of changes in weight and HbA1c levels. RESULTS:A total of 202 participants were recruited and randomized into the intervention (n=101) or control group (n=99). In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses, changes in the participants' weight and BMI were significantly different at 6 months between the intervention and control groups, but there was no difference in HbA1c levels (mean difference 0.004%, SE 0.05; P=.94). Weight and BMI were lower in the intervention group by -2.64 kg (SE 0.71; P<.001) and -0.99 kg/m2 (SE 0.29; P=.001), respectively. These differences persisted at 12 months. However, in the analyses that did not involve ITT, program completers achieved a significant weight loss of 5.6% (SE 0.81; P<.001) at 6 months, maintaining 4.7% (SE 0.88; P<.001) of their weight loss at 12 months. The control group lost -0.15% at 6 months (SE 0.64; P=.85) and gained 0.33% (SE 0.70; P=.63) at 12 months. Those randomized to the intervention group who did not start the program had no meaningful weight or HbA1c level change, similar to the control group. At 1 year, the intervention group showed a 0.23% reduction in HbA1c levels; those who completed the intervention showed a 0.28% reduction. Those assigned to the control group had a 0.16% reduction in HbA1c levels. CONCLUSIONS:This novel mobile-delivered DPP achieved significant weight loss reductions for up to 1 year compared with usual care. This type of intervention reduces the risk of overt diabetes without the added barriers of in-person interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03865342; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03865342.

Dataset Information

Telehealth delivery of the diabetes prevention program to rural communities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets