Diabetes Self-Management Models to Reduce Health Disparities (P20-P2)

August 7, 2013 updated by: Sam Forjuoh, Scott and White Hospital & Clinic

Employing Diabetes Self-Management Models to Reduce Health Disparities in Texas

To evaluate the effectiveness of two different diabetes self-management approaches (Personal Digital Assistant-based intervention & Chronic Disease Self-Management Program) to reduce health disparities in minority, rural residents, and other underserved populations with type 2 diabetes in Central Texas. We hypothesise that: 1) Racial/ethnic minority patients with T2DM will be found to experience disparities in diabetes self-management treatment protocols and clinical outcomes, which persist even when controlling for age, gender, obesity, and insurance status; 2) Patients with T2DM who reside in more rural areas will be found to experience disparities in diabetes self-management treatment protocols and clinical outcomes as compared to more urban counterparts, controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, obesity, and insurance status; 3) The introduction of CSDMP and HIT protocols will improve diabetes-related self management behaviors, reduce HBA1c values, and increase quality of life in persons with T2DM as compared to controls. A combined intervention approach will result in the greatest reductions; 4) Health improvements following the introduction of CDSMP, HIT or CDSMP/HIT protocols in persons with T2DM compared to controls will be more marked in racial/ethnic minority patients and those patients residing in rural areas; 5) The introduction of self-management interventions will be cost-effective in reducing HbA1c values over time, and associated health care utilization including overall reduction in ER and acute care hospital admissions; 6) Although there is little prior research in this area to guide specific hypotheses, we hypothesize that, overall, there will be no significant cost-effective differential in CDSMP as compared to HIT approaches, although the cost-effective ratio may be stronger in particular subpopulations. The combined approach will have higher costs, but is also anticipated to have a higher cost-benefit ratio for minority populations; 7) The majority of clinicians will be willing to let their patients enroll in the study and will reinforce intervention protocols; and 8) These interventions can be embedded into existing health care structures. At the end of the study, Scott and White will institutionalize cost-effective treatment protocols.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Despite concerted federal and state attempts to reduce health disparities over the past decades substantial disparities in reported rates of chronic disease for minorities still exist. In particular, African Americans and Hispanics experience higher rates of Type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) than do other segments of the U.S. population. The objectives of this proposed research project are to test two different diabetes self-management (DSM) programs in a large multi-site health care organization in Central Texas that serves large populations of minority and rural residents, comparing outcomes in order to evaluate their efficacy for reducing health disparities. Our specific aims are to: 1) document the nature and magnitude of extant health disparities in diabetes treatment processes and outcomes; 2) evaluate different DSM intervention approaches on behavioral and clinical outcomes, with attention to differential effects by patient and environmental characteristics; 3) examine the cost-effectiveness of these different approaches to DSM education in minority and rural populations; and 4) explore the reach of our intervention efforts and the broader organizational impacts of DSM education, including feedback loops to clinicians and organizational receptivity to self-management approaches. Our study will employ four different activities: 1) an initial electronic chart review of 1300 records of adults; 2) a 2 by 2 open 24 month randomized clinical trial of behaviorally and technologically based DSM interventions with 400 adults age 21 and older who have type 2 diabetes (T2DM); 3) a cost-effectiveness analysis of the different treatment approaches; and 4) surveys of primary care providers and health care administrators. While our primary outcome will be reductions in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), our conceptual model includes clinical, behavioral, economic and organizational outcomes. We will also assess the extent to which our interventions reduce health disparities by examining differential treatment success. This study is innovative in its comparison of both behavioral and technological intervention approaches, its attention to the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of different intervention approaches, and its concern with organizational responses to intervention sustainability. A noteworthy significance will be the strengthening of the linkages between clinical and community treatment approaches and the identification of successful treatment strategies in different settings and populations.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
376

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Texas
      • Temple, Texas, United States, 76504
        • Scott & White Clinic

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with T2DM, including those who require insulin therapy, aged >18 years (eliminates the need to obtain assent for minors who are also dependent on their parents).
  • Last measured HbA1c value of > 7.5% (this study hopes to show an improvement in the control of patient's diabetes, and not focused on patients who already show evidence of good disease control).
  • Willingness and ability to attend one initial research visit and semi-annual routine follow-up visits over a 24-month period. The follow-up visits include height, weight, and blood pressure measurement and a survey. Surveys may be conducted by phone interview or mail when a follow-up visit can not be scheduled.
  • Ability to read, write, and speak English at least at a grade 8 level so as to be able to engage in self-monitoring and use the commercial diabetes management software program (Diabetes Pilot), which is available only in English. For those with lower-literacy, assistance in filling out forms and understanding required intervention protocols will be provided, and use of a "buddy" will be recommended.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Not willing to sign an informed consent or be randomized to any of the four treatment/control groups, (we want to minimize any upfront treatment biases, while adhering to human subject protocols).
  • Currently, documented severe alcoholism or drug abuse that is < 6 months ago (concerns that this problem is likely to significantly affect their ability and likelihood to comply with the study requirements over the course of the 24 months).
  • Female patients who are pregnant or planning to become pregnant within 12 months (in pregnancy, type 2 diabetes is managed in a completely different manner than in non-pregnant patients).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
No Intervention: Control
Usual Care
Experimental: Personal Digital Assistant
Individuals in this arm were taught to use a diabetes self-care software, Diabetes Pilot™ (Digital Altitudes, Arlington Heights, IL), developed for PalmOS® (Palm, Sunnyvale, CA) which was loaded on to compatible PDAs, the Tungsten™ E2 handheld device. The Diabetes Pilot allowed participants to monitor their blood glucose, blood pressure, medication usage, physical activity, and dietary intake by tracking these measures in an electronic diary.
Behavioral: PDA
Technological assistance
Other Names:
  • Personal digital assistant
Active Comparator: CDSMP
6-week, classroom-based program for diabetes self-management. The CDSMP, developed by Stanford University, equipped participants with the education and skill sets needed to take a more proactive approach in managing their chronic condition(s) and related symptoms.
Behavioral: CDSMP
6-week classes
Other Names:
  • Chronic disease self-management program
Active Comparator: PDA/CDSMP
Combined intervention
Behavioral: PDA/CDSMP
Combined technology and education
Other Names:
  • PDA + CDSMP

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
HbA1c
Time Frame: 12 months
Measures of HbA1c were collected from electronic health records dating back six months prior to orientation to the last day of study participation (45 days after the 12-month follow-up period). If a participant did not have any HbA1c value within the electronic health record for any particular follow-up visit, a lab test was scheduled to obtain a measure. Of the HbA1c collected six months prior to orientation, the value measured closest to the orientation date was considered as the baseline HbA1c value. HbA1c values that were measured on dates preceding the baseline HbA1c were not included; i.e., HbA1c values included in the analysis were those collected since the baseline HbA1c and until the last day of study participation.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
BMI
Time Frame: 12 months
Body mass index
12 months
Patient Self-reported Perceived Health Status
Time Frame: 12 months
12 months
Diabetes-related Behaviors
Time Frame: 12 months
Participants were asked the number of days in the past 7 which they participated in various diabetes self-care activities on diet, exercise, home blood glucose monitoring, and foot care.
12 months
Quality of Life (QOL)
Time Frame: 12 months
Participants where asked the number of days in the past 30 days in which their physical (phys) and/or mental was not good, and whether their usual activity was affected by their physical/mental health.
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Scott and White Hospital & Clinic

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Texas A&M University

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Samuel N Forjuoh, MD MPH DrPH, Scott & White

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Helpful Links

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
January 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
May 1, 2012

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
May 1, 2012

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
October 13, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
October 13, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 14, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
October 14, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 7, 2013

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
August 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 071304
  • P20MD002295 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings