Search

BACKGROUND: Effective type 2 diabetes care remains a challenge for patients including those receiving primary care in safety net settings. OBJECTIVE: The Partnership to Improve Diabetes Education (PRIDE) trial team and leaders from a regional department of health evaluated approaches to improve care for vulnerable patients. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial. PATIENTS: Adults with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes seeking care across 10 unblinded, randomly assigned safety net clinics in Middle TN. INTERVENTIONS: A literacy-sensitive, provider-focused, health communication intervention (PRIDE; 5 clinics) vs. standard diabetes education (5 clinics). MAIN MEASURES: Participant-level primary outcome was glycemic control [A1c] at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included select health behaviors and psychosocial aspects of care at 12 and 24 months. Adjusted mixed effects regression models were used to examine the comparative effectiveness of each approach to care. KEY RESULTS: Of 410 patients enrolled, 364 (89%) were included in analyses. Median age was 51 years; Black and Hispanic patients represented 18% and 25%; 96% were uninsured, and 82% had low annual income level (

Patient-provider communication is modifiable and is linked to diabetes outcomes. The association of communication quality with medical mistrust is unknown. We examined these factors within the context of a low-literacy/numeracy-focused intervention to improve diabetes care, using baseline data from diverse patients enrolled in a randomized trial of a health communication intervention. Demographics, measures of health communication (Communication Assessment Tool [CAT], Interpersonal Processes of Care survey [IPC-18]), health literacy (Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults), depression, medical mistrust, and glycemic control were ascertained. Adjusted proportional odds models were used to test the association of mistrust with patient-reported communication quality. The interaction effect of health literacy on mistrust and communication quality was also assessed. A total of 410 patients were analyzed. High levels of mistrust were observed. In multivariable modeling, patients with higher mistrust had lower adjusted odds of reporting a higher CAT score (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.52, 0.86], p = .003) and higher scores on the Communication (AOR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.55, 0.88], p = .008), Decided Together (AOR = 0.74, 95% CI [0.59, 0.93], p = .02), and Interpersonal Style (AOR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.53, 0.90], p = .015) subscales of the IPC-18. We observed evidence of an interaction effect of health literacy for the association between mistrust and the Decided Together subscale of the IPC-18 such that patients with higher mistrust and lower literacy perceived worse communication relative to mistrustful patients with higher literacy. In conclusion, medical mistrust was associated with poorer communication with providers in this public health setting. Patients' health literacy level may vary the effect of mistrust on interactional aspects of communication. Providers should consider the impact of mistrust on communication with vulnerable diabetes populations and focus efforts on mitigating its influence.

Aims Food insecurity is the ‘limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods’. Our objective was to examine the association between food insecurity, diabetes self-care and glycaemic control. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from adult patients with Type 2 diabetes who were enrolled in a randomized trial evaluating a health literacy-focused diabetes intervention in safety net primary care clinics in middle Tennessee. Food insecurity was assessed with three items from the U.S. Household Food Security Survey. Diabetes self-care behaviours were assessed with the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Scale, Personal Diabetes Questionnaire and Adherence to Refills and Medication Scale. Glycaemic control was assessed with HbA1c. Results The sample consisted of 401 participants, 73% of whom reported some level of food insecurity. Food insecurity was significantly associated with self-care behaviours including less adherence to a general diet [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 0.9, P = 0.02], less physical activity (AOR 0.9, P = 0.04) and with a greater occurrence of medication non-adherence (AOR 1.2, P = 0.002) and calorie restriction (AOR 1.1, P = 0.02). Food insecurity was also associated with worse glycaemic control (adjusted β = 0.1, P = 0.03). None of the self-care behaviours were significantly associated with HbA1c, limiting the ability to test for self-care as a mechanism linking food insecurity to glycaemic control. Conclusions There was a high rate of food insecurity in a sample of patients with Type 2 diabetes who were of low socio-economic status. Food insecurity was associated with less adherence to recommended self-care behaviours and worse glycaemic control.

Diabetes patients with limited resources often experience suboptimal care. Less is known about the role of effective health communication (HC) in caring for low income diabetes patients.Ten health department clinics in TN participated in a trial evaluating a literacy-sensitive communication intervention. We assessed the quality of baseline HC and measured associations with diabetes outcomes. Assessments included: demographics, measures of HC, health literacy, self-care behaviors, self-efficacy, medication non-adherence, treatment satisfaction, and A1C. Unadjusted and adjusted multivariable regression models were used to test associations.Participants (N=411) were 49.7±9.5 years, 61% female, uninsured (96%), with A1C 9.6±2.1. In unadjusted analyses, better communication, was associated with lower medication non-adherence (OR 0.40-0.68, all p0.05), higher treatment satisfaction (OR 1.76-1.96, all p0.01), portion size reduction (OR 1.43, p0.05), diabetes self-efficacy (OR 1.41, p0.05), and lower A1C (β=-0.06, p0.01). In adjusted analyses, communication quality remained associated with lower medication non-adherence (AOR 0.39-0.68, all p0.05), and higher treatment satisfaction (AOR 1.90-2.21, all p0.001).Better communication between low-income patients and providers was independently associated with lower medication non-adherence and higher treatment satisfaction.Communication quality may be an important modifiable approach to improving diabetes care for vulnerable populations.