Search

Background: Diabetes group visits (GVs) are a promising way to deliver high quality care but have been understudied in community health centers (CHCs), across multiple sites, or with a focus on patient-centered outcomes. Methods: We trained staff and healthcare providers from six CHCs across five Midwestern states to implement a 6-month GV program at their sites. We assessed the impact of diabetes GVs on patient clinical and self-reported outcomes and processes of care compared to patients receiving usual care at these sites during the same period using a prospective controlled study design. Results: CHCs enrolled 51 adult patients with diabetes with glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) ≥ 8% for the GV intervention and conducted chart review of 72 patients receiving usual care. We analyzed A1C at baseline, 6, and 12 months, low-density lipoproteins (LDL), blood pressure, and patient-reported outcomes. GV patients had a larger decrease in A1C from baseline to 6 months (-1.04%, 95% CI: -1.64, -0.44) and 12 months (-1.76, 95% CI: -2.44, -1.07) compared to usual care; there was no change in blood pressure or LDL. GV patients had higher odds of receiving a flu vaccination, foot exam, eye exam, and lipid panel in the past year compared to usual care but not a dental exam, urine microalbumin test, or blood pressure check. For GV patients, diabetes distress decreased, diabetes-related quality of life improved, and self-reported frequency of healthy eating and checking blood sugar increased from baseline to 6 months, but there was no change in exercise or medication adherence. Conclusions: A diabetes GV intervention improved blood glucose levels, self-care behaviors, diabetes distress, and processes of care among adults with elevated A1Cs compared to patients receiving usual care. Future studies are needed to assess the sustainability of clinical improvements and costs of the GV model in CHCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 2016 American Diabetes Association position statement emphasized that psychosocial and medical care should be integrated and provided to all people with diabetes. Objective: To determine whether better integration of diabetes and depression care is associated with better glycemic control. Design: Cross-sectional surveys of Midwestern federally qualified health center (FQHC) leaders and primary care providers (PCPs) in 2016. Responses were linked to FQHC-level data on the percentage of patients with uncontrolled diabetes (glycated hemoglobin ≥ 9%; 75 mmol/mol). Participants: Midwest Clinicians' Network–affiliated FQHC leaders, and PCPs at the FQHCs. Main Measures: Multilevel models were used to determine associations between the percentage of patients with uncontrolled diabetes and FQHC and PCP characteristics; presence of diabetes and behavioral health care services; and PCPs' perception of the stage of integration between diabetes and depression care services based on the transtheoretical model (i.e., pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, or maintenance). Key Results: Response rates were 60% for the FQHC survey (N = 77) and 55% for the PCP survey (N = 538). In adjusted models, FQHCs in which PCPs perceived a higher stage of integration between diabetes and depression care had 3% fewer patients with uncontrolled diabetes per 1-level increase in integration stage (p = 0.01); on-site diabetes self-management education was associated with 7% fewer patients with uncontrolled diabetes (p < 0.01). Conclusions: At Midwestern FQHCs, a higher stage of perceived integration of diabetes and depression care was associated with better FQHC-level glycemic control. Future studies are needed to elucidate what defines integration of diabetes and depression care services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Expanding access to addiction screening and treatment in primary care, particularly in underserved communities, is a key part of the fight against the opioid epidemic. This study explored correlates of addiction treatment capacity in federally qualified health centers participating in the Midwest Clinicians' Network (MWCN).Methods: Two surveys were fielded to 132 MWCN health centers: the Health Center Survey and the Behavioral Health and Diabetes Provider Survey. A total of 77 centers and 515 primary care clinicians, respectively, responded to the surveys. Data were combined with data from the 2016 Uniform Data System and information about receipt of targeted Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) grant funding for addiction treatment capacity. Multivariable models examined associations between Medicaid reimbursement for addiction services, HRSA targeted grant funding, and different types of on-site addiction treatment capacity: psychiatrist and certified addiction counselor staffing, addiction counseling services, and medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid addiction.Results: Health centers that received Medicaid behavioral health reimbursement were five times as likely as those that did not to offer addiction counseling and to employ certified addiction counselors. Health centers that received targeted HRSA funding for addiction services were more than 20 times as likely as those that did not to provide MAT and more than three times as likely to employ psychiatrists. Training needs and privacy protections on data related to addiction treatment were cited as barriers to building addiction treatment capacity.Conclusions: Medicaid funding and targeted grant funding were associated with addiction treatment capacity in health centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]