Improving type 2 diabetes care and self-management at the individual level by incorporating social determinants of health.

OBJECTIVE: Suboptimal social determinants of health impede type 2 diabetes self-management. They are usually considered at population and community levels, not individually. The study objective was to draw on perspectives of people who have type 2 diabetes to identify and explore the impact of social determinants on self-management and ways to incorporate them into individual care. METHODS: Purposively selected participants chose to partake in focus groups or interviews. Data were analysed and themes identified through deductive and inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Social issues hinder type 2 diabetes self-management. Additionally, an individual's feelings and poor mental health, competing priorities and understanding about diabetes are important considerations. Support was provided via health professionals, community supports, financial support, personal support and informal self-management support. CONCLUSIONS: Social determinants of health could be formally incorporated into individual care for people with type 2 diabetes if a socio-ecological view of health is taken as it considers the broader social and environmental circumstances in peoples lives. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Care for people with type 2 diabetes could be transformed if social determinants of health are formally assessed and responded to at an individual level. A socio-ecological view of health in individual care and clinical settings would enable social determinants of health to be formally incorporated into type 2 diabetes care.

Incorporating social determinants of health into individual care-a multidisciplinary perspective of health professionals who work with people who have type 2 diabetes.

Social determinants of health (SDoH) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are interrelated. The prevalence of T2DM is increased amongst those with suboptimal SDoH. Poor SDoH can also negatively impact T2DM self-management. Social determinants of health are mostly considered at population and community levels, rather than individually or clinically. This qualitative study combines the perspectives of a multidisciplinary cohort of health professionals to identify and explore the impact of social determinants on self-management, and ways they could be incorporated into individual clinical care. Purposively selected participants chose to partake in an in-depth, semi-structured, one-on-one interview or focus group. Data were analysed, and themes identified using a combination of deductive and inductive thematic analysis. Fifty-one health professionals volunteered for the study. Two small focus groups (n = 3 and n = 4) and 44 one-on-one interviews were conducted. The identified themes were: 1) Support for incorporating SDoH into T2DM care, 2) Effect of SDoH on T2DM self-management, 3) Identifying and addressing social need, 4) Requirements for incorporating SDoH into T2DM individual clinical care. Health professionals reported that poor social determinants negatively affect an individual's ability to self manage their T2DM. Person-centred care could be enhanced, and people with T2DM may be more likely to achieve self-management goals if SDoH were included in individual clinical care. To achieve successful and sustained self-management for people with T2DM, health professionals require a thorough understanding of T2DM and the effect of social determinants, respect for client privacy, client trust and rapport, effective communication skills, validated tools for assessing SDoH, team champions, teamwork, ongoing education and training, adequate resources, guiding policies and procedures, and management support. Incorporating SDoH into individual, clinical care for people with T2DM was strongly supported by health professionals. If embraced, this addition to care for individuals with T2DM could improve self-management capacity and enhance person-centred care.

Indigenous Australian perspectives on incorporating the social determinants of health into the clinical management of type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes mellitus and social disadvantage are related. In Australia, this association is most pronounced among Indigenous Australians (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples). Indigenous Australians are among the most socially disadvantaged in the country, having the worst social determinants of health (SDoH). SDoH are typically addressed at a population level, and not on an individual or a clinical level. However, the SDoH-related needs of individuals also require attention. The adverse link between type 2 diabetes and SDoH suggests that simultaneous consideration at an individual, clinical level may be beneficial for type 2 diabetes care and self-management. Identifying and addressing SDoH-related barriers to type 2 diabetes self-management may augment current care for Indigenous Australians. This study aimed to combine the perspectives of Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes and Indigenous health workers to explore the SDoH-related barriers and facilitators to self-managing type 2 diabetes, and how SDoH could be incorporated into the usual clinical care for Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Under the guidance of a cultural advisor and Indigenous health workers, seven Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes and seven Indigenous health workers from rural and remote north Queensland, Australia, participated in a series of semi-structured, in-depth face-to-face interviews and yarning circles. A clinical yarning approach to data collection was used, and both an inductive and a deductive data analysis were applied. Data were analysed, and themes were identified using NVivo v12. RESULTS: Study participants described a holistic view of health that innately includes SDoH. Specific to type 2 diabetes care, participants identified that culturally responsive service delivery, suitable transport provision, an infinite flexible approach to accommodate for individuals' unique social circumstances, appropriate client education and appropriate cultural education for health professionals, support mechanisms and community support services were all essential components. These were not seen as separate entities, but as interrelated, and all were required in order to incorporate SDoH into care for Indigenous Australians with type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSION: SDoH are implicit to the Indigenous Australian holistic view of health. Consequently, an approach to type 2 diabetes care that complements this view by simultaneously considering SDoH and usual type 2 diabetes clinical management could lead to enhanced type 2 diabetes care and self-management for Indigenous Australians.

Utilising clinical settings to identify and respond to the social determinants of health of individuals with type 2 diabetes-A review of the literature.

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is increasing in global prevalence. It is more common among people with poor social determinants of health (SDoH). Social determinants of health are typically considered at a population and community level; however, identifying and addressing the barriers related to SDoH at an individual and clinical level, could improve the self-management of T2DM. This literature review aimed to explore the methods and strategies used in clinical settings to identify and address the SDoH in individuals with T2DM. A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature using the electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus and Informit was conducted between April and May 2017. Literature published between 2002 and 2017 was considered. Search results (n = 1,119) were screened by title and abstract against the inclusion and exclusion criteria and n = 56 were retained for full text screening. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Review and synthesis of the literature revealed written and phone surveys were the most commonly used strategy to identify social determinant-related barriers to self-management. Commonly known SDoH such as; income, employment, education, housing and social support were incorporated into the SDoH assessments. Limited strategies to address the identified social needs were revealed, however community health workers within the clinical team were the primary providers of social support. The review highlights the importance of identifying current and individually relevant social determinant-related issues, and whether they are perceived as barriers to T2DM self-management. Identifying self-management barriers related to SDoH, and addressing these issues in clinical settings, could enable a more targeted intervention based on individually identified social need. Future research should investigate more specific ways to incorporate SDoH into the clinical management of T2DM.

Understanding disability and the 'social determinants of health': how does disability affect peoples' social determinants of health?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate how an individual's social determinants of health are affected by the acquisition of physical disability in adulthood. The secondary aim was to report the described facilitators and barriers to living with a disability. METHOD: This qualitative study used an exploratory, descriptive approach. Nine individuals with a neurologically derived disability were purposively recruited from a rehabilitation center in northern Queensland. Participation in the study involved semi-structured interviews. QSR NVivo was used for the data analysis process. RESULTS: Changes to social determinants of health resulting from the acquisition of disability had substantial flow-on consequences in all aspects of life for the individual and those close to them. Income had the greatest influence over the other social determinant of health. Following the acquisition of disability, the reduced inflow and increased outflow of finances had subsequent negative effects on housing, transport and social interactions, and also personal relationships. CONCLUSIONS: When considering changes to the social determinants of health resulting from disability acquisition, it is impractical to view these changes and those affected in isolation. Consideration of this multidimensional effect on life associated with the acquisition of disability will be useful in disability research, advocacy and support services. Implications for Rehabilitation Social determinants of health are known to have a direct influence on health status. As social determinants of health decrease, morbidity and mortality rates increase. Following the acquisition of disability, there is a decline in social determinants of health. This decline affects quality of life for individuals' with a disability, and those closest to them. The effects of declining social determinants of health may inhibit the rehabilitation process. Thus, it is important to acknowledge the multifaceted impact the acquisition of disability has on peoples' lives, and the consequences this may have for their rehabilitation.

The relationship between social determinants of health, and rehabilitation of neurological conditions: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: This systematic literature review aims to explore the relationship between social determinants of health (SDH), and the rehabilitation of neurological conditions. In particular, the review will consider relationships between social determinants and peoples' attendance and sustained adherence to rehabilitation programs, and motivation regarding neurological rehabilitation. METHOD: A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature from electronic databases; MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL and Informit health, was conducted. Papers published between 2004 and 2014 were considered. RESULTS: Eleven quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a lack of research addressing SDH and neurological rehabilitation simultaneously. Cardiac and cancer rehabilitation studies reported employment and income, social support, transport, housing and food security as the most frequent SDH factors influencing attendance, sustained adherence and motivation. Given this association, a similar relationship between neurological rehabilitation and SDH is plausible. CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation of neurological conditions can be a long and difficult process. To pursue optimal outcomes, an individual's social circumstances should be considered. Understanding how SDH interact with neurological rehabilitation may enhance service delivery, thus maximizing the possible rehabilitation outcomes for individuals. Future research that considers SDH and rehabilitation of neurological conditions jointly may benefit service providers and those requiring neurological rehabilitation. Implications for Rehabilitation Social determinants of health are important to consider in the rehabilitation of neurological conditions. Understanding the interplay between the social determinants of health and neurological rehabilitation may enhance the possible outcomes for those requiring rehabilitation. Increased awareness and capacity of health care professionals involved in neurological rehabilitation may hasten momentum towards decreased health disparities instigated by undesirable social determinants of health.