Measurement and Validation of the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) in a Population With Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) is a validated instrument measuring financial distress among people with cancer. The reliability and construct validity of the 11-item COST-FACIT were examined in adults with diabetes and high A1C. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined the factor structure (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach α), floor/ceiling effects, known-groups validity, and predictive validity among a sample of 600 adults with diabetes and high A1C. RESULTS: COST-FACIT demonstrated a two-factor structure with high internal consistency: general financial situation (7-items, α = 0.86) and impact of illness on financial situation (4-items, α = 0.73). The measure demonstrated a ceiling effect for 2% of participants and floor effects for 7%. Worse financial toxicity scores were observed among adults who were women, were below the poverty line, had government-sponsored health insurance, were middle-aged, were not in the workforce, and had less educational attainment (P < 0.01). Worse financial toxicity was observed for those engaging in cost coping behaviors, such as taking less or skipping medicines, delaying care, borrowing money, "maxing out" the limit on credit cards, and not paying bills (P < 0.01). In regression models for the full measure and its two factors, worse financial toxicity was correlated with higher A1C (P < 0.01), higher levels of diabetes distress (P < 0.01), more chronic conditions (P < 0.01), and more depressive symptoms (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support both the reliability and validity of the COST-FACIT tool among adults with diabetes and high A1C levels. More research is needed to support the use of the COST-FACIT tool as a clinically relevant patient-centered instrument for diabetes care.

Pharmacist engagement in a community pharmacy hypertension management program in collaboration with an academic medical center.

PURPOSE: To explore the perceptions of pharmacists and administrators who had an integral role in designing and operationalizing an integrated community pharmacist hypertension management program with collaboration between an academic medical center and a regional chain community pharmacy. SUMMARY: Community pharmacists (n = 3), ambulatory care pharmacists (n = 2), medical directors (n = 2), and health-system (n = 1) and pharmacy (n = 1) administrators reported positive experiences engaging with the hypertension management program. Strengths of the program included comprehensive training by the ambulatory care pharmacists, community pharmacist access to the electronic health record (EHR), and primary care providers who were receptive to referring patients and accepting recommendations from the community pharmacists. All participants felt that the program had a positive outlook and saw opportunity for expansion, such as extended hours of operation, new locations, and additional pharmacists. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists are well positioned to extend hypertension management programs from primary care clinics into local pharmacies if they have appropriate training, access to the EHR, and ongoing support from collaborating primary care offices. Additional research using implementation science methods is needed to further test the scalability and replicability of the program among different patient populations, community pharmacies, and health systems.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on unmet social needs, self-care, and outcomes among people with diabetes and poor glycemic control.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine whether pandemic exposure impacted unmet social and diabetes needs, self-care behaviors, and diabetes outcomes in a sample with diabetes and poor glycemic control. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of participants with diabetes and poor glycemic control in an ongoing trial (n = 353). We compared the prevalence of unmet needs, self-care behaviors, and diabetes outcomes in successive cohorts of enrollees surveyed pre-pandemic (prior to March 11, 2020, n = 182), in the early stages of the pandemic (May-September, 2020, n = 75), and later (September 2020-January 2021, n = 96) stratified by income and gender. Adjusted multivariable regression models were used to examine trends. RESULTS: More participants with low income reported food insecurity (70% vs. 83%, p < 0.05) and needs related to access to blood glucose supplies (19% vs. 67%, p < 0.05) during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels. In adjusted models among people with low incomes, the odds of housing insecurity increased among participants during the early pandemic months compared with participants pre-pandemic (OR 20.2 [95% CI 2.8-145.2], p < 0.01). A1c levels were better among participants later in the pandemic than those pre-pandemic (ß = -1.1 [95% CI -1.8 to -0.4], p < 0.01), but systolic blood pressure control was substantially worse (ß = 11.5 [95% CI 4.2-18.8, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adults with low-incomes and diabetes were most impacted by the pandemic. A1c may not fully capture challenges that people with diabetes are facing to manage their condition; systolic blood pressures may have worsened and problems with self-care may forebode longer-term challenges in diabetes control.