Social Vulnerability and Initiation of Pharmacotherapy for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in a Medicaid Population

Patient Priorities, Decisional Comfort, and Satisfaction with Metformin versus Insulin for the Treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE

 We compared patient priorities, decisional comfort, and satisfaction with treating gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with metformin versus insulin among pregnant individuals with GDM requiring pharmacotherapy.

STUDY DESIGN

 We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients' perspectives about GDM pharmacotherapy in an integrated prenatal and diabetes care program from October 19, 2022, to August 24, 2023. The exposure was metformin versus insulin as the initial medication decision. Outcomes included standardized measures of patient priorities, decisional comfort, and satisfaction about their medication decision.

RESULTS

 Among 144 assessed individuals, 60.4% were prescribed metformin and 39.6% were prescribed insulin. Minoritized individuals were more likely to receive metformin compared with non-Hispanic White individuals (34.9 vs. 17.5%; p = 0.03). Individuals who were willing to participate in a GDM pharmacotherapy clinical trial were more likely to receive insulin than those who were unwilling (30.4 vs. 19.5%; p = 0.02). Individuals receiving metformin were more likely to report prioritizing avoiding injections (62.4 vs. 19.3%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10-7.31), wanting to take a medication no more than twice daily (56.0 vs. 30.4%; aOR: 3.67; 95% CI: 1.56-8.67), and believing that both medications can equally prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes (70.9 vs. 52.6%; aOR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.19-6.03). Conversely, they were less likely to report prioritizing a medication that crosses the placenta (39.1 vs. 82.5%; aOR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.03-0.25) and needing supplemental insulin to achieve glycemic control (21.2 vs. 47.4%; aOR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15-0.90). Individuals reported similarly high (mean score > 80%) levels of decisional comfort, personal satisfaction with medication decision-making, and satisfaction about their conversation with their provider about their medication decision with metformin and insulin (p ≥ 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

 Individuals with GDM requiring pharmacotherapy reported high levels of decision comfort and satisfaction with both metformin and insulin, although they expressed different priorities in medication decision-making. These results can inform future patient-centered GDM treatment strategies.

KEY POINTS

· Pregnant individuals with GDM requiring pharmacotherapy expressed a high level of decisional comfort and satisfaction with medication decision making.. · Individuals placed different priorities on deciding to take metformin versus insulin.. · These results can inform interventions aimed at delivering person-centered diabetes care in pregnancy that integrates patient autonomy and knowledge about treatment options..

Community-level social determinants of health and pregestational and gestational diabetes

BACKGROUND

Individual adverse social determinants of health are associated with increased risk of diabetes in pregnancy, but the relative influence of neighborhood or community-level social determinants of health is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether living in neighborhoods with greater socioeconomic disadvantage, food deserts, or less walkability was associated with having pregestational diabetes and developing gestational diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a secondary analysis of the prospective Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-To-Be. Home addresses in the first trimester were geocoded at the census tract level. The exposures (modeled separately) were the following 3 neighborhood-level measures of adverse social determinants of health: (1) socioeconomic disadvantage, defined by the Area Deprivation Index and measured in tertiles from the lowest tertile (ie, least disadvantage [T1]) to the highest (ie, most disadvantage [T3]); (2) food desert, defined by the United States Department of Agriculture Food Access Research Atlas (yes/no by low income and low access criteria); and (3) less walkability, defined by the Environmental Protection Agency National Walkability Index (most walkable score [15.26-20.0] vs less walkable score [<15.26]). Multinomial logistic regression was used to model the odds of gestational diabetes or pregestational diabetes relative to no diabetes as the reference, adjusted for age at delivery, chronic hypertension, Medicaid insurance status, and low household income (<130% of the US poverty level).

RESULTS

Among the 9155 assessed individuals, the mean Area Deprivation Index score was 39.0 (interquartile range, 19.0-71.0), 37.0% lived in a food desert, and 41.0% lived in a less walkable neighborhood. The frequency of pregestational and gestational diabetes diagnosis was 1.5% and 4.2%, respectively. Individuals living in a community in the highest tertile of socioeconomic disadvantage had increased odds of entering pregnancy with pregestational diabetes compared with those in the lowest tertile (T3 vs T1: 2.6% vs 0.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-4.48). Individuals living in a food desert (4.8% vs 4.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.77) and in a less walkable neighborhood (4.4% vs 3.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.71) had increased odds of gestational diabetes. There was no significant association between living in a food desert or a less walkable neighborhood and pregestational diabetes, or between socioeconomic disadvantage and gestational diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Nulliparous individuals living in a neighborhood with higher socioeconomic disadvantage were at increased odds of entering pregnancy with pregestational diabetes, and those living in a food desert or a less walkable neighborhood were at increased odds of developing gestational diabetes, after controlling for known covariates.