Numerous studies have translated the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) for community-based settings, and the results are encouraging. This commentary discusses one community-based DPP translational study, Healthy Living Partnerships to Prevent Diabetes, in detail, as well as the implications of DPP translational studies for public policy.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objective:
The purpose of this study was to identify patient preferences for different components of a local diabetes prevention program that would improve reach. A secondary purpose was to determine if patient characteristics were related to program preferences.
Participants were identified through electronic medical records from two family medicine clinics in Virginia. Participants completed a mailed survey addressing demographics, economic status, risk factors for diabetes, and preferences regarding diabetes prevention interventions-delivery mode, program length, and duration.
Twenty-nine percent of eligible participants responded (n = 142); 83% of participants were at risk for diabetes and 82% had a household income <$20,000. When presented with the choice between a class-based vs. a technology-based program, 83% preferred a technology-based program. Whites were less likely to choose the technology-based program, with no significant differences based on age, education, income, or gender.
Contrary to beliefs that lower income individuals may not use technology-based interventions, lower socioeconomic patients indicated a preference for a technology- and telephone-supported diabetes prevention program over in-person class approaches. Findings provide formative data to support the design of a patient-centered, technology-enhanced diabetes prevention program in a real-world setting, thereby increasing potential participation and reach.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 02/2014; 11(2):2003-13. DOI:10.3390/ijerph110202003 · 2.06 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Hispanics are at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Lifestyle interventions are effective in preventing diabetes and restoring glucose regulation.
We recruited Hispanic men and women (N = 320) who were residents of the Lower Yakima Valley, Washington, aged 18 years or older with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels higher than 6% to a parallel 2-arm randomized-controlled trial conducted from 2008 through 2012. The trial compared participants in the intervention arm, who received an immediate educational curriculum (n = 166), to participants in the control arm, who received a delayed educational curriculum (n = 154). The home-based curriculum consisted of 5 sessions led by community health workers and was designed to inform participants about diabetes, diabetes treatment, and healthy dietary and physical activity behaviors. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention and control arms, and analysts were blinded as to participant arm. We evaluated intervention effects on HbA1c levels; frequency (times per week) of fruit and vegetable consumption; and frequency (times per week) of mild, moderate, and strenuous leisure-time physical activity. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months after randomization, participants completed a questionnaire and provided a blood sample. Analysts were blinded to intervention arm.
The immediate intervention group (-0.64% [standard error (SE) 0.10]) showed a significant improvement in HbA1c scores (-37.5%, P = .04) compared with the delayed intervention group (-0.44%, P = .14). No significant changes were seen for dietary end points or changes in physical activity. We did observe a trend of greater increases in frequency of moderate and vigorous physical activity and a smaller increase in mild physical activity in the immediate intervention group than in the delayed intervention group.
This home-based intervention delivered by CHWs was associated with a clinically and statistically significant reduction in HbA1c levels in Hispanic adults with HbA1c levels higher than 6%.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.