Increasing prevalence of cirrhosis among insured adults in the United States, 2012-2018.

BACKGROUND: Liver cirrhosis is a chronic disease that is known as a "silent killer" and its true prevalence is difficult to describe. It is imperative to accurately characterize the prevalence of cirrhosis because of its increasing healthcare burden. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, trends in cirrhosis prevalence were evaluated using administrative data from one of the largest national health insurance providers in the US. (2011-2018). Enrolled adult (≥18-years-old) patients with cirrhosis defined by ICD-9 and ICD-10 were included in the study. The primary outcome measured in the study was the prevalence of cirrhosis 2011-2018. RESULTS: Among the 371,482 patients with cirrhosis, the mean age was 62.2 (±13.7) years; 53.3% had commercial insurance and 46.4% had Medicare Advantage. The most frequent cirrhosis etiologies were alcohol-related (26.0%), NASH (20.9%) and HCV (20.0%). Mean time of follow-up was 725 (±732.3) days. The observed cirrhosis prevalence was 0.71% in 2018, a 2-fold increase from 2012 (0.34%). The highest prevalence observed was among patients with Medicare Advantage insurance (1.67%) in 2018. Prevalence increased in each US. state, with Southern states having the most rapid rise (2.3-fold). The most significant increases were observed in patients with NASH (3.9-fold) and alcohol-related (2-fold) cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: Between 2012-2018, the prevalence of liver cirrhosis doubled among insured patients. Alcohol-related and NASH cirrhosis were the most significant contributors to this increase. Patients living in the South, and those insured by Medicare Advantage also have disproportionately higher prevalence of cirrhosis. Public health interventions are important to mitigate this concerning trajectory of strain to the health system.

Clinical performance and health equity implications of the American Diabetes Association's 2023 screening recommendation for prediabetes and diabetes.

Introduction: The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for prediabetes and diabetes (dysglycemia) starting at age 35, or younger than 35 years among adults with overweight or obesity and other risk factors. Diabetes risk differs by sex, race, and ethnicity, but performance of the recommendation in these sociodemographic subgroups is unknown. Methods: Nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2015-March 2020) were analyzed from 5,287 nonpregnant US adults without diagnosed diabetes. Screening eligibility was based on age, measured body mass index, and the presence of diabetes risk factors. Dysglycemia was defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100mg/dL (≥5.6 mmol/L) or haemoglobin A1c ≥5.7% (≥39mmol/mol). The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the ADA screening criteria were examined by sex, race, and ethnicity. Results: An estimated 83.1% (95% CI=81.2-84.7) of US adults were eligible for screening according to the 2023 ADA recommendation. Overall, ADA's screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity [95.0% (95% CI=92.7-96.6)] and low specificity [27.1% (95% CI=24.5-29.9)], which did not differ by race or ethnicity. Sensitivity was higher among women [97.8% (95% CI=96.6-98.6)] than men [92.4% (95% CI=88.3-95.1)]. Racial and ethnic differences in sensitivity and specificity among men were statistically significant (P=0.04 and P=0.02, respectively). Among women, guideline performance did not differ by race and ethnicity. Discussion: The ADA screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity for all groups and was marginally higher in women than men. Racial and ethnic differences in guideline performance among men were small and unlikely to have a significant impact on health equity. Future research could examine adoption of this recommendation in practice and examine its effects on treatment and clinical outcomes by sex, race, and ethnicity.

Screening for Prediabetes and Diabetes in a National Network of Federally Qualified Health Centers: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended screening for prediabetes and diabetes among adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity. Studying dysglycemia screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) that serve vulnerable patient populations is needed to understand health equity implications of this recommendation. OBJECTIVE: To investigate screening practices among FQHC patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study analyzing electronic health records from a national network of 282 FQHC sites. PARTICIPANTS: We included 183,329 patients without prior evidence of prediabetes or diabetes, who had ≥ 1 office visit from 2018-2020. MAIN MEASURES: Screening eligibility was based on age and measured body mass index (BMI). The primary outcome, screening completion, was ascertained using hemoglobin A1c or fasting plasma glucose results from 2018-2020. KEY RESULTS: Among 89,543 patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation, 53,263 (59.5%) were screened. Those who completed screening had higher BMI values than patients who did not (33.0 ± 6.7 kg/m2 vs. 31.9 ± 6.2 kg/m2, p < 0.001). Adults aged 50-64 years had greater odds of screening completion relative to younger patients (OR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.10-1.17). Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as those without health insurance, were more likely to complete screening than White patients and insured patients, respectively. Clinical risk factors for diabetes were also associated with dysglycemia screening. Among patients who completed screening, 23,588 (44.3%) had values consistent with prediabetes or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of FQHC patients who would be eligible according to the 2021 USPSTF recommendation were screened. Screening completion was higher among middle-aged patients, those with greater BMI values, as well as vulnerable groups with a high risk of developing diabetes. Future research should examine adoption of the 2021 USPSTF screening recommendation and its impact on health equity.

Primary care delivery of behavioral weight loss services for adults with cardiovascular risk factors: development of pragmatic practice components and results of a randomized feasibility trial.

Background: Intensive lifestyle interventions (ILI) improve weight loss and cardiovascular risk factors, but health systems face challenges implementing them. We engaged stakeholders to cocreate and evaluate feasibility of primary care implementation strategies and of a pragmatic randomization procedure to be used for a future effectiveness trial. Methods: The study setting was a single, urban primary care office. Patients with BMI ≥ 27 and ≥ 1 cardiovascular risk factor were sent a single electronic health record (EHR) message between December 2019 and January 2020 offering services to support an initial weight loss goal of about 10 pounds in 10 weeks. All patients who affirmed weight loss interest were pragmatically enrolled in the trial and offered "Basic Lifestyle Services" (BLS), including a scale that transmits weight data to the EHR using cellular networks, a coupon to enroll in lifestyle coaching resources through a partnering fitness organization, and periodic EHR messages encouraging use of these resources. About half (n = 42) of participants were randomized by an automated EHR algorithm to also receive "Customized Lifestyle Services" (CLS), including weekly email messages adapted to individual weight loss progress and telephonic coaching by a nurse for those facing challenges. Interventions and assessments spanned January to July 2020, with interference by the coronavirus pandemic. Weight measures were collected from administrative sources. Qualitative analysis of stakeholder recommendations and patient interviews assessed acceptability, appropriateness, and sustainability of intervention components. Results: Over 6 weeks, 426 patients were sent the EHR invitation message and 80 (18.8%) affirmed interest in the weight loss goal and were included for analysis. EHR data were available to ascertain a 6-month weight value for 77 (96%) patients. Overall, 62% of participants lost weight; 15.0% exhibited weight loss ≥ 5%, with no statistically significant difference between CLS or BLS arms (p = 0.85). CLS assignment increased participation in daily self-weighing (43% versus 21% of patients through 12 weeks) and enrollment in referral-based lifestyle support resources (52% versus 37%). Conclusions: This preliminary study demonstrates feasibility of implementation strategies for primary care offices to offer and coordinate ILI core components, as well as a pragmatic randomization procedure for use in a future randomized comparative trial.

Menu Calorie Label Use and Diet Quality: a Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Menu calorie labeling has been implemented in food service businesses to promote healthy food choices; however, evidence is limited on whether label use is associated with healthier dietary intake. This study examined the association between menu calorie label use and diet quality and whether it varied by weight status. METHODS: Adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2017-2018 who visited restaurants were included. Menu calorie label use was categorized as did not notice labels, noticed labels, and used labels. Diet quality was measured using the Healthy Eating Index 2015 (maximum score 100) by two 24-hour diet recalls. The association between menu calorie label use and diet quality was examined using multiple linear regression and tested for effect modification by weight status. Data were collected during 2017-2018 and analyzed during 2022-2023. RESULTS: Of 3,312 participants (representing 195,167,928 U.S. adults), 43% did not notice labels, 30% noticed labels, and 27% used labels. Using labels was associated with 4.0 points (95% CI 2.2, 5.8) higher Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores than not noticing labels. Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores in those using labels were higher for adults with normal BMI (3.4 points; 95% CI=0.2, 6.7), overweight (6.5 points; 95% CI=3.6, 9.5), and obesity (3.0 points; 95% CI=1.0, 5.1) (p-interaction=0.0004) than those who did not notice labels. CONCLUSIONS: Using menu calorie labels was associated with modestly healthier diet quality than not noticing labels, regardless of weight status. This suggests that providing caloric information may help some adults with food decisions.

Primary care delivery of behavioral weight loss services for adults with cardiovascular risk factors: development of pragmatic implementation strategies and results of a randomized feasibility trial.

Background: Intensive lifestyle interventions (ILI) improve weight loss and cardiovascular risk factors, but health systems face challenges implementing them. We engaged stakeholders to cocreate and evaluate feasibility of primary care implementation strategies and of a pragmatic randomization procedure to be used for a future effectiveness trial. Methods: The study setting was a single, urban primary care office. Patients with BMI ≥ 27 and ≥ 1 cardiovascular risk factor were sent a single electronic health record (EHR) message between December 2019 and January 2020 offering services to support an initial weight loss goal of about "10 pounds in 10 weeks." All patients who affirmed weight loss interest were pragmatically enrolled in the trial and offered "Basic Lifestyle Services" (BLS), including a scale that transmits weight data to the EHR using cellular networks, a coupon to enroll in lifestyle coaching resources through a partnering fitness organization, and periodic EHR messages encouraging use of these resources. About half (n = 42) of participants were randomized by an automated EHR algorithm to also receive "Customized Lifestyle Services" (CLS), including weekly email messages adapted to individual weight loss progress and telephonic coaching by a nurse for those facing challenges. Interventions and assessments spanned January to July 2020, with interference by the coronavirus pandemic. Weight measures were collected from administrative sources. Qualitative analysis of stakeholder recommendations and patient interviews assessed acceptability, appropriateness, and sustainability of intervention components. Results: Over 6 weeks, 426 patients were sent the EHR invitation message and 80 (18.8%) affirmed interest in the weight loss goal and were included for analysis. EHR data were available to ascertain a 6-month weight value for 77 (96%) patients. Overall, 62% of participants lost weight; 15.0% exhibited weight loss ≥ 5%, with no statistically significant difference between CLS or BLS arms (p = 0.85). CLS assignment increased participation in daily self-weighing (43% versus 21% of patients through 12 weeks) and enrollment in referral-based lifestyle support resources (52% versus 37%). Conclusions: This preliminary study demonstrates feasibility of implementation strategies for primary care offices to offer and coordinate ILI core components, as well as a pragmatic randomization procedure for use in a future randomized comparative trial.

Design and rationale of behavioral nudges for diabetes prevention (BEGIN): A pragmatic, cluster randomized trial of text messaging and a decision aid intervention for primary care patients with prediabetes.

BACKGROUND: Among 96 million U.S. adults with prediabetes, adoption of evidence-based treatment to prevent diabetes remains low. Primary care represents an essential venue for preventing diabetes, yet providers in this setting have limited time to address prevention. This highlights the need for low-touch interventions that promote diabetes prevention and are not delivered by primary care providers. Text messaging and decision aids displaying disease risk and treatment information have improved outcomes in prior research. However, these approaches have not been definitively studied for managing prediabetes. METHODS: The Behavioral Nudges for Diabetes Prevention (BEGIN) trial is a pragmatic, cluster randomized trial testing the effectiveness of text messaging about diabetes prevention and a prediabetes decision aid. These interventions are being studied in 8 primary care clinics using a 2 × 2 factorial design, in which pairs of clinics are randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive usual care, text messaging alone, prediabetes decision aid alone, or both interventions. A total of 656 patients are recruited to participate, receive the study interventions, and contribute data at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome is 12-month weight change, and the secondary outcome is adoption of evidence-based treatment to prevent diabetes. Change in hemoglobin A1c is an exploratory outcome that will be assessed among participants with available values. CONCLUSION: Findings from the BEGIN trial will provide evidence about the effectiveness of two novel, low-touch interventions focused on diabetes prevention in primary care, where patients are diagnosed with prediabetes and there is little prior research. TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT04869917.

Screening for Prediabetes and Diabetes: Clinical Performance and Implications for Health Equity.

INTRODUCTION: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prediabetes and diabetes screening for asymptomatic adults aged 35-70 years with overweight/obesity, lowering the age from 40 years in its 2015 recommendation. The USPSTF suggested considering earlier screening in racial and ethnic groups with high diabetes risk at younger ages or lower BMI. This study examined the clinical performance of these USPSTF screening recommendations as well as alternative age and BMI cutoffs in the U.S. adult population overall, and separately by race and ethnicity. METHODS: Nationally representative data were collected from 3,243 nonpregnant adults without diagnosed diabetes in January 2017-March 2020 and analyzed from 2021 to 2022. Screening eligibility was based on age and measured BMI. Collectively, prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes were defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100 mg/dL or hemoglobin A1c ≥5.7%. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of alternate screening criteria were examined overall, and by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: The 2021 criteria exhibited marginally higher sensitivity (58.6%, 95% CI=55.5, 61.6 vs 52.9%, 95% CI=49.7, 56.0) and lower specificity (69.3%, 95% CI=65.7, 72.2 vs 76.4%, 95% CI=73.3, 79.2) than the 2015 criteria overall, and within each racial and ethnic group. Screening at lower age and BMI thresholds resulted in even greater sensitivity and lower specificity, especially among Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and Asian adults. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years regardless of BMI yielded the most equitable performance across all racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 2021 USPSTF screening criteria will identify more adults with prediabetes and diabetes in all racial and ethnic groups than the 2015 criteria. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years exhibited even higher sensitivity and performed most similarly by race and ethnicity, which may further improve early detection of prediabetes and diabetes in diverse populations.

Comparative cardiovascular effects of GLP-1 agonists using real-world data.

AIMS: There is limited research using real-world data to evaluate protective cardiovascular effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) early in treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, active comparator cohort study using 2011-2015 administrative claims data to compare cardiovascular disease (CVD) event rates following initiation of exenatide extended-release (E-ER), exenatide immediate-release (E-IR) or liraglutide in T2D adults who previously received no other antidiabetic medication (ADM) except metformin. The primary outcome was time to first major adverse CVD event (ischaemic heart disease, stroke, congestive heart failure or peripheral arterial disease) after starting GLP-1. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model the association between index GLP-1 and CVD events, adjusting for baseline patient, prescriber and plan characteristics. Primary analyses included all patients with ≥2 prescription fills for the index GLP-1, regardless of subsequent refill adherence or initiation of other ADM after index date. RESULTS: Compared with liraglutide, neither E-ER nor E-IR was associated with risk of composite major CVD events (hazard ratios [HRs] for E-ER and E-IR: 1.33 [95% C.I. 0.73-2.39] and 1.30 [0.81-2.09]). No associations were observed between event rates for individual CVD components. The HR for an ischaemic event with E-IR relative to liraglutide was 1.85 (95% C.I. 0.97-3.53). Adjusting for time-varying exposure to other ADM and CVD medications after index date produced similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating either immediate or extended-release exenatide rather than liraglutide was not associated with significant differences in CVD risk in this observational real-world study.

Treatment modification after initiating second-line medication for type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To describe changes in antidiabetic medication (ADM) use and characteristics associated with changes in ADM use after initiation of noninsulin second-line therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: This study analyzed private health plan claims for adults with type 2 diabetes who initiated 1 of 5 index ADM classes: sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or thiazolidinediones. Analyses evaluated 3 treatment modification outcomes-discontinuation, switching, and intensification-over 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Of 82,624 included adults, nearly two-thirds (63.6%) experienced any treatment modification. Discontinuation was the most common modification (38.6%), especially among patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs (50.3%). Switching occurred in 5.2% of patients and intensification in 19.8%. In adjusted analysis, compared with patients prescribed sulfonylureas, discontinuation risk was 7% higher (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) among patients prescribed DPP4is and 28% higher (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.23-1.33) among patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs. Compared with sulfonylureas, all other index ADM classes had higher risks of switching and lower risks of intensification. Younger age group and female sex were both associated with higher risks of all modifications. Compared with index ADM prescription by a family medicine or internal medicine physician, index prescription by an endocrinologist was associated with both lower discontinuation risk and higher intensification risk. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients experienced a treatment modification within 1 year. Results highlight the need for new prescribing approaches and patient supports that can maximize medication adherence and reduce health system waste.

An EHR-automated and theory-based population health management intervention for smoking cessation in diverse low-income patients of safety-net health centers: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

This study tested the preliminary effectiveness of an electronic health record (EHR)-automated population health management (PHM) intervention for smoking cessation among adult patients of a federally qualified health center in Chicago. Participants (N = 190; 64.7% women, 82.1% African American/Black, 8.4% Hispanic/Latino) were self-identified as smokers, as documented in the EHR, who completed the baseline survey of a longitudinal "needs assessment of health behaviors to strengthen health programs and services." Four weeks later, participants were randomly assigned to the PHM intervention (N = 97) or enhanced usual care (EUC; N = 93). PHM participants were mailed a single-page self-determination theory (SDT)-informed letter that encouraged smoking cessation or reduction as an initial step. The letter also addressed low health literacy and low income. PHM participants also received automated text messages on days 1, 5, 8, 11, and 20 after the mailed letter. Two weeks after mailing, participants were called by the Illinois Tobacco Quitline. EUC participants were e-referred following a usual practice. Participants reached by the quitline were offered behavioral counseling and nicotine replacement therapy. Outcome assessments were conducted at weeks 6, 14, and 28 after the mailed letter. Primary outcomes were treatment engagement, utilization, and self-reported smoking cessation. In the PHM arm, 25.8% of participants engaged in treatment, 21.6% used treatment, and 16.3% were abstinent at 28 weeks. This contrasts with no quitline engagement among EUC participants, and a 6.4% abstinence rate. A PHM approach that can reach all patients who smoke and address unique barriers for low-income individuals may be a critical supplement to clinic-based care.

Development of a novel clinical decision support tool for diabetes prevention and feasibility of its implementation in primary care.

Prediabetes impacts 88 million U.S. adults, yet uptake of evidence-based treatment with intensive lifestyle interventions and metformin remains exceedingly low. After incorporating feedback from 15 primary care providers collected during semi-structured interviews, we developed a novel Prediabetes Clinical Decision Support (PreDM CDS) from August 2019 to February 2020. This tool included order options enabling prediabetes management in a single location within the electronic health record. We conducted a retrospective observational study examining the feasibility of implementing this tool at Erie Family Health Centers, a large community health center, examining its use and related outcomes among patients for whom it was used vs not. Overall, 7,424 eligible patients were seen during the implementation period (February 2020 to August 2021), and the PreDM CDS was used for 108 (1.5 %). Using the PreDM CDS was associated with higher rates of hemoglobin A1c orders (70.4 % vs 22.2 %; p < 0.001), lifestyle counseling (38.0 % vs 7.8 %; p < 0.001), and metformin prescription orders (5.6 % vs 2.6 %; p = 0.06). Exploratory analyses revealed small, nonsignificant weight loss among patients for whom the PreDM CDS was used. This study demonstrates the feasibility of developing and implementing the PreDM CDS in primary care. Its low use was likely related to not imposing an interruptive 'pop-up' alert, as well as major changes in workflows and clinical priorities during the Covid-19 pandemic. Use of the tool was associated with improved process outcomes. Future efforts with the PreDM CDS should follow standard CDS implementation processes that were not possible due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Patient-Reported Outcome Dashboards Within the Electronic Health Record to Support Shared Decision-making: Protocol for Co-design and Clinical Evaluation With Patients With Advanced Cancer and Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes-symptoms, treatment side effects, and health-related quality of life-are important to consider in chronic illness care. The increasing availability of health IT to collect patient-reported outcomes and integrate results within the electronic health record provides an unprecedented opportunity to support patients' symptom monitoring, shared decision-making, and effective use of the health care system. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are to co-design a dashboard that displays patient-reported outcomes along with other clinical data (eg, laboratory tests, medications, and appointments) within an electronic health record and conduct a longitudinal demonstration trial to evaluate whether the dashboard is associated with improved shared decision-making and disease management outcomes. METHODS: Co-design teams comprising study investigators, patients with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease, their care partners, and their clinicians will collaborate to develop the dashboard. Investigators will work with clinic staff to implement the co-designed dashboard for clinical testing during a demonstration trial. The primary outcome of the demonstration trial is whether the quality of shared decision-making increases from baseline to the 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include longitudinal changes in satisfaction with care, self-efficacy in managing treatments and symptoms, health-related quality of life, and use of costly and potentially avoidable health care services. Implementation outcomes (ie, fidelity, appropriateness, acceptability, feasibility, reach, adoption, and sustainability) during the co-design process and demonstration trial will also be collected and summarized. RESULTS: The dashboard co-design process was completed in May 2020, and data collection for the demonstration trial is anticipated to be completed by the end of July 2022. The results will be disseminated in at least one manuscript per study objective. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol combines stakeholder engagement, health care coproduction frameworks, and health IT to develop a clinically feasible model of person-centered care delivery. The results will inform our current understanding of how best to integrate patient-reported outcome measures into clinical workflows to improve outcomes and reduce the burden of chronic disease on patients and health care systems. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38461.

Evaluating Natural Experiments that Impact the Diabetes Epidemic: an Introduction to the NEXT-D3 Network.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetes is an ongoing public health issue in the USA, and, despite progress, recent reports suggest acute and chronic diabetes complications are increasing. RECENT FINDINGS: The Natural Experiments for Translation in Diabetes 3.0 (NEXT-D3) Network is a 5-year research collaboration involving six academic centers (Harvard University, Northwestern University, Oregon Health & Science University, Tulane University, University of California Los Angeles, and University of California San Francisco) and two funding agencies (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health) to address the gaps leading to persisting diabetes burdens. The network builds on previously funded networks, expanding to include type 2 diabetes (T2D) prevention and an emphasis on health equity. NEXT-D3 researchers use rigorous natural experiment study designs to evaluate impacts of naturally occurring programs and policies, with a focus on diabetes-related outcomes. NEXT-D3 projects address whether and to what extent federal or state legislative policies and health plan innovations affect T2D risk and diabetes treatment and outcomes in the USA; real-world effects of increased access to health insurance under the Affordable Care Act; and the effectiveness of interventions that reduce barriers to medication access (e.g., decreased or eliminated cost sharing for cardiometabolic medications and new medications such as SGLT-2 inhibitors for Medicaid patients). Overarching goals include (1) expanding generalizable knowledge about policies and programs to manage or prevent T2D and educate decision-makers and organizations and (2) generating evidence to guide the development of health equity goals to reduce disparities in T2D-related risk factors, treatment, and complications.

Randomized Trial Evaluating Health System Expenditures with Transitional Care Services for Adults with No Usual Source of Care at Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary transitional care services reduce readmissions for high-risk patients, but it is unclear if health system costs to offer these intensive services are offset by avoidance of higher downstream expenditures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate net costs for a health system offering transitional care services DESIGN: One-year pragmatic, randomized trial PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 without a usual source of follow-up care at the time of hospital discharge were enrolled through a high-volume, urban academic medical center in Chicago, IL, USA, from September 2015 through February 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were silently randomized before discharge by an automated electronic health record algorithm allocating them in a 1:3 ratio to receive routine coordination of post-discharge care (RC) versus being offered intensive, multidisciplinary transitional care (TC) services. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Health system costs were collected from facility administrative systems and transformed to standardized costs using Medicare reference files. Multivariable generalized linear models estimated proportional differences in net costs over one year. KEY RESULTS: Study patients (489 TC; 164 RC) had a mean age of 44 years; 34% were uninsured, 55% had public insurance, and 49% self-identified as Black or Latinx. Over 90 days, cost differences between groups were not statistically significant. Over 180 days, the TC group had 41% lower ED/observation costs (adjusted cost ratio [aCR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.97), 50% lower inpatient costs (aCR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95), and 41% lower total healthcare costs (aCR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.99) than the RC group. Over 365 days, total cost differences remained of similar magnitude but no longer were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Offering TC services for vulnerable adults at discharge reduced net health system expenditures over 180 days. The promising economic case for multidisciplinary transitional care interventions warrants further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Clinical Trials Registry (NCT03066492).

Initiating second-line antidiabetic medication among older adults with type 2 diabetes on Metformin.

BACKGROUND: Antidiabetic medications (ADM), especially sulfonylureas (SFU) and basal insulin (BI), are associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia, which is especially concerning among older adults in poor health. The objective of this study was to investigate prescribing patterns of ADM in older adults according to their health status. METHODS: This case control study analyzed administrative claims between 2013 and 2017 from a large national payer. The study population was derived from a nationwide database of 84,720 U.S. adults aged ≥65, who were enrolled in Medicare Advantage health insurance plans. Participants had type 2 diabetes on metformin monotherapy, and started a second-line ADM during the study period. The exposure was a binary variable for health status, with poor health defined by end-stage medical conditions, dementia, or residence in a long-term nursing facility. The outcome was a variable identifying which second-line ADM class was started, categorized as SFU, BI, or other (i.e. all other ADM classes combined). RESULTS: Over half of participants (54%) received SFU as initial second-line ADM, 14% received BI, and 32% received another ADM. In multivariable models, the odds of filling SFU or BI was higher for participants in poor health than those in good or intermediate health [OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.05-1.21) and OR 2.34 (95% CI 2.14-2.55), respectively]. SFU and BI were also more commonly filled by older adults with poor glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Despite clinical consensus to use caution prescribing SFU and BI among older adults in poor health, these medications remain frequently used in this particularly vulnerable population.

User-centered development of a smartphone application (Fit2Thrive) to promote physical activity in breast cancer survivors.

Increased moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is associated with better health outcomes in breast cancer survivors; yet, most are insufficiently active. Smartphone applications (apps) to promote MVPA have high scalability potential, but few evidence-based apps exist. The purpose is to describe the testing and usability of Fit2Thrive, a MVPA promotion app for breast cancer survivors. A user-centered, iterative design process was utilized on three independent groups of participants. Two groups of breast cancer survivors (group 1 n = 8; group 2: n = 14) performed app usability field testing by interacting with the app for ≥3 days in a free-living environment. App refinements occurred following each field test. The Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) and the User Version Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS) assessed app usability and quality on a 7- and 5-point scale, respectively, and women provided qualitative written feedback. A third group (n = 15) rated potential app notification content. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using a directed content analysis. The PSSUQ app usability score (M1= 3.8; SD = 1.4 vs. M2= 3.2; SD = 1.1; lower scores are better) and uMARS app quality score (M1 = 3.4; SD = 1.3 vs. M2= 3.4; SD = 0.6; higher scores are better) appeared to improve in Field Test 2. Group 1 participants identified app "clunkiness," whereas group 2 participants identified issues with error messaging/functionality. Group 3 "liked" 53% of the self-monitoring, 71% of the entry reminder, 60% of the motivational, and 70% of the goal accomplishment notifications. Breast cancer survivors indicated that the Fit2Thrive app was acceptable and participants were able to use the app. Future work will test the efficacy of this app to increase MVPA.

Optimization of a technology-supported physical activity promotion intervention for breast cancer survivors: Results from Fit2Thrive.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for breast cancer survivors are well established. However, most are insufficiently active. Fit2Thrive used the Multiphase Optimization Strategy methodology to determine the effect of 5 intervention components on MVPA in this population. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-nine participants (mean age, 52.5 years; SD, 9.9 years) received a core intervention (the Fit2Thrive self-monitoring app and Fitbit) and were randomly assigned to 5 intervention components set to on/off in a full factorial experiment: support calls, deluxe app, buddy, online gym, and text messages. The intervention was delivered over 12 weeks with a 12-week follow-up. MVPA was measured via accelerometry at the baseline (T1), at 12 weeks (T2), and at 24 weeks (T3). The main effects and interaction effects at each time point were examined for all components. RESULTS: Trial retention was high: 91.8% had valid accelerometer data at T2 or T3. Across all conditions, there were significant increases in MVPA (+53.6 min/wk; P < .001) and in the proportion of survivors meeting MVPA guidelines (+22.3%; P < .001) at T2 that were maintained but attenuated at T3 (MVPA, +24.6 min/wk; P < .001; meeting guidelines, +12.6%; P < .001). No individual components significantly improved MVPA, although increases were greater for the on level versus the off level for support calls, buddy, and text messages at T2 and T3. CONCLUSIONS: The Fit2Thrive core intervention (the self-monitoring app and Fitbit) is promising for increasing MVPA in breast cancer survivors, but the components provided no additional increases in MVPA. Future research should evaluate the core intervention in a randomized trial and determine what components optimize MVPA behaviors in breast cancer survivors.

Integrating diabetes technologies with team-based primary care for type 2 diabetes: A pilot trial.

This pilot trial studied a novel intervention that integrated diabetes technologies into team-based primary care for type 2 diabetes. We found clinically significant reductions in blood pressure, weight, and glucose. The latter two were statistically significant.