Protocol for the Northern Manhattan Diabetes Community Outreach Project. A randomised trial of a community health worker intervention to improve diabetes care in Hispanic adults

Walter Palmas, Jeanne A Teresi, Sally Findley, Miriam Mejia, Milagros Batista, Jian Kong, Stephanie Silver, Jose A Luchsinger, Olveen Carrasquillo, Walter Palmas, Jeanne A Teresi, Sally Findley, Miriam Mejia, Milagros Batista, Jian Kong, Stephanie Silver, Jose A Luchsinger, Olveen Carrasquillo

Abstract

Objective: Hispanics in the USA are affected by the diabetes epidemic disproportionately, and they consistently have lower access to care, poorer control of the disease and higher risk of complications. This study evaluates whether a community health worker (CHW) intervention may improve clinically relevant markers of diabetes care in adult underserved Hispanics.

Methods and analysis: The Northern Manhattan Diabetes Community Outreach Project (NOCHOP) is a two-armed randomised controlled trial to be performed as a community-based participatory research study performed in a Primary Care Setting in Northern Manhattan (New York City). 360 Hispanic adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (haemoglobin A1c >8%), aged 35-70 years, will be randomised at a 1:1 ratio, within Primary Care Provider clusters. The two study arms are (1) a 12-month CHW intervention and (2) enhanced usual care (educational materials mailed at 4-month intervals, preceded by phone calls). The end points, assessed after 12 months, are primary = haemoglobin A1c and secondary = blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels. In addition, the study will describe the CHW intervention in terms of components and intensity and will assess its effects on (1) medication adherence, (2) medication intensification, (3) diet and (4) physical activity.

Ethics and dissemination: All participants will provide informed consent; the study protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Columbia University Medical Center. CHW interventions hold great promise in improving the well-being of minority populations who suffer from diabetes mellitus. The NOCHOP study will provide valuable information about the efficacy of those interventions vis-à-vis clinically relevant end points and will inform policy makers through a detailed characterisation of the programme and its effects.

Clinical trial registration number: NCT00787475 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

References

    1. Mainous AG, 3rd, Baker R, Koopman RJ, et al. Impact of the population at risk of diabetes on projections of diabetes burden in the United States: an epidemic on the way. Diabetologia 2007;50:934–40
    1. Harris MI, Eastman RC, Cowie CC, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in glycemic control of adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 1999;22:403–8
    1. Harris MI. Racial and ethnic differences in health care access and health outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2001;24:454–9
    1. . Policy statements adopted by the Governing Council of the American Public Health Association, November 18, 1998. Am J Public Health 1999;89:428–50
    1. Mieres JH, Phillips LM. The interdisciplinary approach to culturally tailored medical care: “Social networking” for decreasing risk: comment on “The effects of a nurse case manager and a community health worker team on diabetic control, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations among urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial” and “Trial of family and friend support for weight loss in African American adults”. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1804–5
    1. Perez LM, Martinez J. Community health workers: social justice and policy advocates for community health and well-being. Am J Public Health 2008;98:11–14
    1. Babamoto KS, Sey KA, Camilleri AJ, et al. Improving diabetes care and health measures among hispanics using community health workers: results from a randomized controlled trial. Health Educ Behav 2009;36:113–26
    1. Brown SA, Garcia AA, Kouzekanani K, et al. Culturally competent diabetes self-management education for Mexican Americans: the Starr County border health initiative. Diabetes Care 2002;25:259–68
    1. Gary TL, Batts-Turner M, Bone LR, et al. A randomized controlled trial of the effects of nurse case manager and community health worker team interventions in urban African-Americans with type 2 diabetes. Control Clin Trials 2004;25:53–66
    1. Gary TL, Batts-Turner M, Yeh HC, et al. The effects of a nurse case manager and a community health worker team on diabetic control, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations among urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1788–94
    1. Gary TL, Bone LR, Hill MN, et al. Randomized controlled trial of the effects of nurse case manager and community health worker interventions on risk factors for diabetes-related complications in urban African Americans. Prev Med 2003;37:23–32
    1. Lujan J, Ostwald SK, Ortiz M. Promotora diabetes intervention for Mexican Americans. Diabetes Educ 2007;33:660–70
    1. Lorig K, Ritter PL, Villa FJ, et al. Community-based peer-led diabetes self-management: a randomized trial. Diabetes Educ 2009;35:641–51
    1. Hawthorne K, Robles Y, Cannings-John R, et al. Culturally appropriate health education for type 2 diabetes mellitus in ethnic minority groups. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;(3):CD006424.
    1. Sarkisian CA, Brown AF, Norris KC, et al. A systematic review of diabetes self-care interventions for older, African American, or Latino adults. Diabetes Educ 2003;29:467–79
    1. Lewin SA, Dick J, Pond P, et al. Lay health workers in primary and community health care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;(1):CD004015.
    1. Swider SM. Outcome effectiveness of community health workers: an integrative literature review. Public Health Nurs 2002;19:11–20
    1. Bakken S, Lantigua RA, Busacca LV, et al. Barriers, enablers, and incentives for research participation: a report from the Ambulatory Care Research Network (ACRN). J Am Board Fam Med 2009;22:436–45
    1. Shea S, Weinstock RS, Teresi JA, et al. A randomized trial comparing telemedicine case management with usual care in older, ethnically diverse, medically underserved patients with diabetes mellitus: 5 year results of the IDEATel study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009;16:446–56
    1. White MJ, Stark JR, Luckmann R, et al. Implementing a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system to increase colorectal cancer screening: a process evaluation. Patient Educ Couns 2006;61:419–28
    1. Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS. Estimation of the concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in plasma, without use of the preparative ultracentrifuge. Clin Chem 1972;18:499–502
    1. MacLaughlin EJ, Raehl CL, Treadway AK, et al. Assessing medication adherence in the elderly: which tools to use in clinical practice? Drugs Aging 2005;22:231–55
    1. Winston GJ, Barr RG, Carrasquillo O, et al. Sex and racial/ethnic differences in cardiovascular disease risk factor treatment and control among individuals with diabetes in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Diabetes Care 2009;32:1467–9
    1. Blair SN, Haskell WL, Ho P, et al. Assessment of habitual physical activity by a seven-day recall in a community survey and controlled experiments. Am J Epidemiol 1985;122:794–804
    1. Thompson FE, Kipnis V, Subar AF, et al. Evaluation of 2 brief instruments and a food-frequency questionnaire to estimate daily number of servings of fruit and vegetables. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;71:1503–10
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001;16:606–13
    1. Findley SE, Irigoyen M, See D, et al. Community-provider partnerships to reduce immunization disparities: field report from northern Manhattan. Am J Public Health 2003;93:1041–4
    1. Bar-Yam Y. Improving the effectiveness of health care and public health: a multiscale complex systems analysis. Am J Public Health 2006;96:459–66
    1. Whetten K, Leserman J, Whetten R, et al. Exploring lack of trust in care providers and the government as a barrier to health service use. Am J Public Health 2006;96:716–21
    1. Konrad TR, Howard DL, Edwards LJ, et al. Physician-patient racial concordance, continuity of care, and patterns of care for hypertension. Am J Public Health 2005;95:2186–90
    1. Gunn PP, Fremont AM, Bottrell M, et al. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy Rule: a practical guide for researchers. Med Care 2004;42:321–7
    1. Donner A. Approaches to sample size estimation in the design of clinical trials—a review. Stat Med 1984;3:199–214
    1. Sullivan LM, D'Agostino RB. Robustness and power of analysis of covariance applied to data distorted from normality by floor effects: homogeneous regression slopes. Stat Med 1996;15:477–96
    1. Hsieh FY. Sample size formulae for intervention studies with the cluster as unit of randomization. Stat Med 1988;7:1195–201
    1. Klar N, Donner A. The merits of matching in community intervention trials: a cautionary tale. Stat Med 1997;16:1753–64
    1. D'Agostino RB., Sr Controlling alpha in a clinical trial: the case for secondary endpoints. Stat Med 2000;19:763–6
    1. Koch GG. Discussion for ‘Alpha calculus in clinical trials: considerations and commentary for the new millennium’. Stat Med 2000;19:781–4
    1. Moye LA. Alpha calculus in clinical trials: considerations and commentary for the new millennium. Stat Med 2000;19:767–79
    1. Moye LA. Response to commentaries on ‘Alpha calculus in clinical trials: considerations for the new millennium’. Stat Med 2000;19:795–9
    1. O'Neill RT. Commentary on ‘Alpha calculus in clinical trials: considerations and commentary for the new millennium’. Stat Med 2000;19:785–99
    1. Proschan MA, Waclawiw MA. Practical guidelines for multiplicity adjustment in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:527–39
    1. Taylor A, West S, Aiken L. Loss of power in logistic, ordinal logistic and probit regression when an outcome variable is coarsely categorized. Educ Psychol Meas 2006;66:228–39
    1. Petkova E, Teresi J. Some statistical issues in the analyses of data from longitudinal studies of elderly chronic care populations. Psychosom Med 2002;64:531–47
    1. Liu X, Teresi JA, Waternaux C. Modelling the decline pattern in functional measures from a prevalent cohort study. Stat Med 2000;19:1593–606
    1. Gardiner JC, Luo Z, Roman LA. Fixed effects, random effects and GEE: what are the differences? Stat Med 2009;28:221–39
    1. Petkova E, Teresi J. Some statistical issues in the analyses of data from longitudinal studies of elderly chronic care populations. Psychosom Med 2002;64:531–47

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren