Implementing a national diabetes prevention programme in England: lessons learned

Lifestyle interventions for cardiometabolic health

Unhealthy lifestyle behaviors such as poor diets and physical inactivity account for most of the cardiometabolic disease (CMD) burden, including type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Much of this burden is mediated by the effects of unhealthy lifestyle behaviors on overweight and obesity, and disproportionally impacts certain population groups-including those from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. Combined lifestyle interventions (CLIs), which target multiple behaviors, have the potential to prevent CMD, but their implementation, reach and effectiveness in routine practice are often limited. Considering the increasing availability of effective but expensive pharmaceutical options for weight loss, we review the short-term and long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness of CLIs on overweight, obesity and associated CMDs, in controlled studies and in routine care. Against the backdrop of changing living environments, we discuss the effective components of CLIs and the many challenges associated with implementing them. Finally, we outline future directions for research and implications for policy and practice to improve lifestyle behaviors and cardiometabolic health at the population level.

Transferability of the NHS low-calorie diet programme: A qualitative exploration of factors influencing the programme's transfer ahead of wide-scale adoption

INTRODUCTION

Although behavioural interventions have been found to help control type 2 diabetes (T2D), it is important to understand how the delivery context can influence implementation and outcomes. The NHS committed to testing a low-calorie diet (LCD) programme designed to support people living with excess weight and T2D to lose weight and improve diabetes outcomes. Understanding what influenced implementation during the programme pilot is important in optimising rollout. This study explored the transferability of the NHS LCD Programme prior to wider adoption.

METHODS

Twenty-five interviews were undertaken with stakeholders involved in implementing the LCD programme in pilot sites (health service leads, referring health professionals and programme deliverers). Interviews with programme participants (people living with T2D) were undertaken within a larger programme of work, exploring what worked, for whom and why, which is reported separately. The conceptual Population-Intervention-Environment-Transfer Model of Transferability (PIET-T) guided study design and data collection. Constructs of the model were also used as a deductive coding frame during data analysis. Key themes were identified which informed recommendations to optimise programme transfer.

RESULTS

Population: Referral strategies in some areas lacked consideration of population characteristics. Many believed that offering a choice of delivery model would promote acceptability and accessibility of the eligible population.

INTERVENTION

Overall, stakeholders had confidence in the LCD programme due to the robust evidence base along with anecdotal evidence, but some felt the complex referral process hindered engagement from GP practices.

ENVIRONMENT

Stakeholders described barriers to accessing the programme, including language and learning difficulties. Transferability: Multidisciplinary working and effective communication supported successful implementation.

CONCLUSION

Referral strategies to reach underrepresented groups should be considered during programme transfer, along with timely data from service providers on access and programme benefits. A choice of delivery models may optimise uptake. Knowledge sharing between sites on good working practices is encouraged, including increasing engagement with key stakeholders.

The challenges and lessons from a formative process and value-based evaluation of the wave 1 roll-out of the all Wales Diabetes Prevention Programme

BACKGROUND

The All Wales Diabetes Prevention Programme (AWDPP) is a Wales wide, public health initiative designed to systematically identify adults at risk of developing type 2 diabetes and offer a 30-minute person-centred lifestyle conversation focused on diet and physical activity. An independent formative process and value-based evaluation was commissioned to examine the implementation of this programme in 14 primary care cluster areas across Wales during the initial roll-out.

METHODS

This evaluation was undertaken to ascertain the views on early implementation of the programme from service users, health care professionals and key stakeholders. The evaluation was informed by the Medical Research Council Framework for Process Evaluation and Wales Prudent Healthcare principles. As part of the value-based assessment, a preliminary cost-consequence analysis was conducted to understand the short-term economic impact of the implementation of the programme.

RESULTS

Service users who took part in the evaluation highly valued the programme and nearly half had been previously unaware that they were at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Delivering the programme presented challenges but there was significant enthusiasm and support from all stakeholders. Overall, the programme was being delivered as intended albeit with evidence of some variation in the application of the programme eligibility criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

In Wave 1 of the AWDPP roll-out, the intent to deliver the programme in line with Prudent Healthcare was successful and promising in terms of demonstrating value. Opinions expressed by service users suggest the AWDPP matters to them; raising awareness, promoting knowledge and capacity to change behaviours and motivate and raise confidence.

Healthcare workers' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment to diabetes prevention programmes: a systematic review protocol

Background

Diabetes is a growing global health problem. International guidelines recommend identification, screening, and referral to behavioural programmes for those at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Diabetes prevention programmes (DPPs) can prevent type 2 diabetes in those at high risk, however many eligible participants are not referred to these programmes. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are pivotal to the referral and recruitment processes. This study aims to identify, appraise and synthesise the evidence on barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment to DPPs from the perspective of HCWs.

Methods

A "best fit" framework synthesis method will synthesise qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods evidence on factors that affect HCWs referral and recruitment to DPPs, with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) as the a priori framework. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched for primary studies published in English. Year of publication will be restricted to the last 26 years (1997-2023). Quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A mix of deductive coding using the TDF and inductive coding of data that does not fit the TDF will be synthesised into themes representing the whole dataset. The relationships between the final set of themes will be explored to create a new model to understand HCWs' perspectives on referral and recruitment to DPPs. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out on this conceptual model. Confidence in the synthesised findings will be assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach. One author will screen, extract, appraise the literature while a second author will independently verify a 20% sample at each stage.

Discussion

Participation in DPPs is key for programme impact. HCWs typically identify those at risk and refer them to DPPs. Understanding HCWs' perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment will inform future implementation of DPPs.

Process evaluation of a primary care-based type 2 diabetes remission project in the North East of England

A type 2 diabetes remission project, Remission in Diabetes (REMI.D), funded by Sport England, was developed by stakeholders based in the North East of England and begun in early 2020. This local delivery pilot sought to tackle health inequalities by working with multiple organisations to demonstrate a way of scaling up an effective type 2 diabetes remission strategy which included both physical activity and dietary components. The intended delivery of the original project was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and changes were made to the project delivery in 2022. The aim of this process evaluation was to learn from the reactive decisions taken by stakeholders which altered the REMI.D project in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Twelve stakeholders (from local authorities, secondary care, universities, NHS England commissioning, Diabetes UK, Sport England, Everyone Active and Active Partnerships) involved in the design and delivery of the intervention took part in a semi-structured interview lasting up to 60 min. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis used the pre-determined 'core content' themes from the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions. Three topics for discussion emerged as follows: (a) lack of effective collaboration, (b) perception of change and (c) scalability of the intervention. Hierarchy within the stakeholder group initially hampered collaboration. Change was reactive as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Project changes reduced project sustainability and scalability but offered valuable learning about the need for explicit project theory for partnership working, co-production with service users and project flexibility for long-term health behaviour change.

Implementation of a group-based lifestyle intervention programme (Healthy Heart) in general practices in The Netherlands: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Lifestyle intervention programmes target behavioural risk factors that contribute to cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Unfortunately, sustainable implementation of these programmes can be challenging. Gaining insights into the barriers and facilitators for successful implementation is important for maximising public health impact of these interventions. The Healthy Heart (HH) programme is an example of a combined lifestyle intervention programme.

AIM

To analyse the reach, adoption, and implementation of the HH programme.

DESIGN & SETTING

A mixed-methods study conducted in a general practice setting in The Netherlands.

METHOD

Quantitative data were collected from the Healthy Heart study (HH study), a non-randomised cluster stepped-wedge trial to assess the effect of the HH programme on patients at high risk of developing CVDs at practice level. Qualitative data were obtained through focus groups.

RESULTS

Out of 73 approached general practices, 55 implemented the HH programme. A total of 1082 patients agreed to participate in the HH study, of whom 64 patients were referred to the HH programme and 41 patients participated. Several barriers for participation were identified such as time investment, lack of risk perception, and being confident in changing lifestyle on their own. Important barriers for healthcare providers (HCPs) to refer a patient were time investment, lack of information to sufficiently inform patients, and preconceived notions regarding which patients the programme was suitable for.

CONCLUSION

This study has offered insights from a patient and HCP perspective regarding barriers and facilitators for implementation of the group-based lifestyle intervention programme. The identified barriers and facilitators, and the suggested improvements, can be used by others who wish to implement a similar programme.

Diabetes prevention at scale: Narrative review of findings and lessons from the DIPLOMA evaluation of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme in England

AIMS

The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) is a large-scale, England-wide behaviour change programme for people at high risk of progressing to type 2 diabetes. We summarise the findings of our six-year DIPLOMA evaluation of its implementation and impact and highlight insights for future programmes.

METHODS

Using qualitative interviews, document analysis, observation, surveys and large dataset analysis, eight interlinked work packages considered: equity of access; implementation; service delivery and fidelity; programme outcomes; comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in reducing diabetes incidence; and patient decision making and experience.

RESULTS

Delivery of the NHS DPP encountered barriers across many aspects of the programme, and we identified inequalities in terms of the areas, organisations and patient populations most likely to engage with the programme. There was some loss of fidelity at all stages from commissioning to participant understanding. Despite these challenges, there was evidence of significant reductions in diabetes incidence at individual and population levels. The programme was cost-effective even within a short time period.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the challenge of translating research evidence into routine NHS delivery at scale, our findings suggest that an individual-level approach to the prevention of type 2 diabetes in a 'high-risk' population was more effective than usual care. By embedding evaluation with programme delivery and working closely with the NHS DPP team, we provided actionable insights for improving communications with potential participants, supporting primary care referral, honing the delivery model with better provider relationships and more patient choice, increasing understanding of behaviour change techniques, and enriching the educational and health coaching content.

Evaluating the Short-Term Costs and Benefits of a Nationwide Diabetes Prevention Programme in England: Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Prevention programmes typically incur short-term costs and uncertain long-term benefits. We use the National Health Service (NHS) England Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) to investigate whether behaviour change programmes may be cost-effective even within the short-term participation period.

METHODS

We analysed 384,611 referrals between June 2016 and March 2019. We estimated NHS costs using implementation costs and provider payments. We used linear regressions to relate utility changes to the number of sessions attended, based on responses to the five-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) at baseline and final session for 18,959 participants. We then calculated the corresponding quality-adjusted life year (QALY) change for all 384,611 referrals by combining the estimated regression coefficients with the observed level of attendance, with individuals that did not attend any programme sessions being assumed to experience zero benefit. In secondary analysis, we added weight change, recorded for 18,105 participants to the regression and applied predicted values to all referrals with missing weight change values estimated using multiple imputation with chained equations. We then estimated the cost-per-QALY generated.

RESULTS

Average cost per referral was £119 (standard deviation: £118; 2020 price year, UK £ Sterling). Each session attended was associated with a 0.0042 increase in utility (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.0025-0.0059). This generated 1,773 QALYs across all referrals (95% CI: 889-2,656). Cost-per-QALY was £24,929 (95% CI: £16,635-49,720) when implementation costs were excluded. Secondary analysis showed each session attended and kilogram of weight lost were associated with 0.0034 (95% CI: 0.0016-0.0051) and 0.0025 (95% CI: 0.0020-0.0031) increases in utility, respectively. These generated 1,542 QALYs, at a cost-per-QALY of £28,661 when implementation costs were excluded.

CONCLUSION

Participants experienced small utility gains from session attendance and weight loss during their programme participation. These benefits alone made this low-cost behaviour change programme potentially cost-effective in the short-term.

A qualitative evaluation of the national rollout of a diabetes prevention programme in England

BACKGROUND

The National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) was commissioned by NHS England in 2016 and rolled out in three 'waves' across the whole of England. It aims to help people with raised blood glucose levels reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes through behaviour change techniques (e.g., weight loss, dietary changes and exercise). An independent, longitudinal, mixed methods evaluation of the NHS DPP was undertaken. We report the findings from the implementation work package: a qualitative interview study with designated local leads, responsible for the local commissioning and implementation of the programme. The aim of the study was to explore how local implementation processes were enacted and adapted over time.

METHODS

We conducted a telephone interview study across two time-points. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews with local leads across 19 sampled case sites were undertaken between October 2019 and January 2020 and 13 interviews with local leads across 13 sampled case sites were conducted between July 2020 and August 2020. Interviews aimed to reflect on the experience of implementation and explore how things changed over time.

RESULTS

We identified four overarching themes to show how implementation was locally enacted and adapted across the sampled case sites: 1. Adapting to provider change; 2. Identification and referral; 3. Enhancing uptake in underserved populations; and 4. Digital and remote service options.

CONCLUSION

This paper reports how designated local leads, responsible for local implementation of the NHS DPP, adapted implementation efforts over the course of a changing national diabetes prevention programme, including how local leads adapted implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper highlights three main factors that influence implementation: the importance of facilitation, the ability (or not) to tailor interventions to local needs and the role of context in implementation.

Diabetes detection in women with gestational diabetes and polycystic ovarian syndrome

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) represent two of the highest risk factors for development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in young women. As these increasingly common conditions generally affect younger women, early detection of dysglycemia is key if preventative measures are to be effective. While international guidance recommends screening for type 2 diabetes, current screening strategies suffer from significant challenges.First, guidance lacks consensus in defining which tests to use and frequency of monitoring, thereby sending mixed messages to healthcare professionals.Second, conformity to guidance is poor, with only a minority of women having tests at the recommended frequency (where specified). Approaches to improve conformity have focused on healthcare related factors (largely technology driven reminder systems), but patient factors such as convenience and clear messaging around risk have been neglected.Third, and most critically, current screening strategies are too generic and rely on tests that become abnormal far too late in the trajectory towards dysglycemia to offer opportunities for effective preventative measures. Risk factors show wide interindividual variation, and insulin sensitivity and β cell function are often abnormal during pre-diabetes stage, well before frank diabetes.New, consistent, targeted screening strategies are required that incorporate early, prevention focused testing and personalised risk stratification.

Examining the Effectiveness of an E-Learning Training Course for Coaches of a Type 2 Diabetes Prevention Program

Small Steps for Big Changes (SSBC) is a community-based diabetes prevention program (DPP). SSBC utilizes a motivational interviewing (MI) informed counseling style to deliver a structured diet and exercise curriculum to empower healthy behavioral modifications and prevent type 2 diabetes (T2D). An electronic learning (e-learning) platform to train SSBC coaches was developed to improve flexibility, reach, and accessibility. While e-learning has shown to be an effective mode of teaching content to health professionals, less is known in the context of DPP coaches. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the SSBC e-learning course. Twenty coaches (eleven fitness staff personnel and nine university students) were recruited through existing fitness facilities to participate in the online SSBC coach training which included completing pre- and post-training questionnaires, seven online modules of content and a mock client session. Knowledge regarding MI (Mpre = 3.30 ± 1.95, Mpost = 5.90 ± 1.29; p < 0.01), SSBC content (Mpre = 5.15 ± 2.23, Mpost = 8.60 ± 0.94; p < 0.01), and T2D (Mpre = 6.95 ± 1.57, Mpost = 8.25 ± 0.72; p < 0.01), and self-efficacy to deliver the program (Mpre = 7.93 ± 1.51, Mpost = 9.01 ± 1.00; p < 0.01) all significantly increased from pre- to post e-learning training. Participants reported positively on the user satisfaction and feedback questionnaire with a mean score of 4.58/5 (SD = 0.36). These findings suggest e-learning platforms are a promising mode to improve DPP coaches' knowledge, counseling skills, and to bolster confidence in program delivery with high levels of satisfaction. E-learning to train DPP coaches allows for effective and feasible expansion of DPP's, ultimately permitting more reach to adults living with prediabetes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41347-023-00316-3.

Application of implementation mapping to develop strategies for integrating the National Diabetes Prevention Program into primary care clinics

Background

Diabetes is considered one of the most prevalent and preventable chronic health conditions in the United States. Research has shown that evidence-based prevention measures and lifestyle changes can help lower the risk of developing diabetes. The National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP) is an evidence-based program recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; it is designed to reduce diabetes risk through intensive group counseling in nutrition, physical activity, and behavioral management. Factors known to influence this program's implementation, especially in primary care settings, have included limited awareness of the program, lack of standard clinical processes to facilitate referrals, and limited reimbursement incentives to support program delivery. A framework or approach that can address these and other barriers of practice is needed.

Objective

We used Implementation Mapping, a systematic planning framework, to plan for the adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the National DPP in primary care clinics in the Greater Houston area. We followed the framework's five iterative tasks to develop strategies that helped to increase awareness and adoption of the National DPP and facilitate program implementation.

Methods

We conducted a needs assessment survey and interviews with participating clinics. We identified clinic personnel who were responsible for program use, including adopters, implementers, maintainers, and potential facilitators and barriers to program implementation. The performance objectives, or sub-behaviors necessary to achieve each clinic's goals, were identified for each stage of implementation. We used classic behavioral science theory and dissemination and implementation models and frameworks to identify the determinants of program adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Evidence- and theory-based methods were selected and operationalized into tailored strategies that were executed in the four participating clinic sites. Implementation outcomes are being measured by several different approaches. Electronic Health Records (EHR) will measure referral rates to the National DPP. Surveys will be used to assess the level of the clinic providers and staff's acceptability, appropriateness of use, feasibility, and usefulness of the National DPP, and aggregate biometric data will measure the level of the clinic's disease management of prediabetes and diabetes.

Results

Participating clinics included a Federally Qualified Health Center, a rural health center, and two private practices. Most personnel, including the leadership at the four clinic sites, were not aware of the National DPP. Steps for planning implementation strategies included the development of performance objectives (implementation actions) and identifying psychosocial and contextual implementation determinants. Implementation strategies included provider-to-provider education, electronic health record optimization, and the development of implementation protocols and materials (e.g., clinic project plan, policies).

Conclusion

The National DPP has been shown to help prevent or delay the development of diabetes among at-risk patients. Yet, there remain many challenges to program implementation. The Implementation Mapping framework helped to systematically identify implementation barriers and facilitators and to design strategies to address them. To further advance diabetes prevention, future program, and research efforts should examine and promote other strategies such as increased reimbursement or use of incentives and a better billing infrastructure to assist in the scale and spread of the National DPP across the U.S.

Healthcare workers’ perspectives on barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment to diabetes prevention programmes: a systematic review protocol

Background: Diabetes is a growing global health problem. International guidelines recommend identification, screening, and referral to behavioural programmes for those at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Diabetes prevention programmes (DPPs) can prevent type 2 diabetes in those at high risk, however many eligible participants are not referred to these programmes. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are pivotal to the referral and recruitment processes. This study aims to identify, appraise and synthesise the evidence on barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment to DPPs from the perspective of HCWs. Methods: A “best fit” framework synthesis method will synthesise qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods evidence on factors that affect HCWs referral and recruitment to DPPs, with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) as the a priori framework. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched for primary studies published in English. Year of publication will be restricted to the last 25 years (1997–2022). Quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A mix of deductive coding using the TDF and inductive coding of data that does not fit the TDF will be synthesised into themes representing the whole dataset. The relationships between the final set of themes will be explored to create a new model to understand HCWs’ perspectives on referral and recruitment to DPPs. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out this conceptual model. Confidence in the synthesised findings will be assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach. One author will screen, extract, appraise the literature while a second author will independently verify a 20% sample at each stage. Discussion: Participation in DPPs is key for programme impact. HCWs typically identify those at risk and refer them to DPPs. Understanding HCWs’ perspectives of the barriers and facilitators to referral and recruitment will inform future implementation of DPPs.

Referral to the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme and conversion from nondiabetic hyperglycaemia to type 2 diabetes mellitus in England: A matched cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NDPP) is a behaviour change programme for adults who are at risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM): people with raised blood glucose levels, but not in the diabetic range, diagnosed with nondiabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH). We examined the association between referral to the programme and reducing conversion of NDH to T2DM.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Cohort study of patients attending primary care in England using clinical Practice Research Datalink data from 1 April 2016 (NDPP introduction) to 31 March 2020 was used. To minimise confounding, we matched patients referred to the programme in referring practices to patients in nonreferring practices. Patients were matched based on age (≥3 years), sex, and ≥365 days of NDH diagnosis. Random-effects parametric survival models evaluated the intervention, controlling for numerous covariates. Our primary analysis was selected a priori: complete case analysis, 1-to-1 practice matching, up to 5 controls sampled with replacement. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted, including multiple imputation approaches. Analysis was adjusted for age (at index date), sex, time from NDH diagnosis to index date, BMI, HbA1c, total serum cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, prescription of metformin, smoking status, socioeconomic status, a diagnosis of depression, and comorbidities. A total of 18,470 patients referred to NDPP were matched to 51,331 patients not referred to NDPP in the main analysis. Mean follow-up from referral was 482.0 (SD = 317.3) and 472.4 (SD = 309.1) days, for referred to NDPP and not referred to NDPP, respectively. Baseline characteristics in the 2 groups were similar, except referred to NDPP were more likely to have higher BMI and be ever-smokers. The adjusted HR for referred to NDPP, compared to not referred to NDPP, was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.87) (p < 0.001). The probability of not converting to T2DM at 36 months since referral was 87.3% (95% CI: 86.5% to 88.2%) for referred to NDPP and 84.6% (95% CI: 83.9% to 85.4%) for not referred to NDPP. Associations were broadly consistent in the sensitivity analyses, but often smaller in magnitude. As this is an observational study, we cannot conclusively address causality. Other limitations include the inclusion of controls from the other 3 UK countries, data not allowing the evaluation of the association between attendance (rather than referral) and conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

The NDPP was associated with reduced conversion rates from NDH to T2DM. Although we observed smaller associations with risk reduction, compared to what has been observed in RCTs, this is unsurprising since we examined the impact of referral, rather than attendance or completion of the intervention.

Does recruiting patients to diabetes prevention programmes via primary care reinforce existing inequalities in care provision between general practices? A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Primary care plays a crucial role in identifying patients' needs and referring at-risk individuals to preventive services. However, well-established variations in care delivery may be replicated in this prevention activity.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether recruiting patients to the English NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme via primary care reinforces existing inequalities in care provision between practices, in terms of clinical quality, accessibility and resources.

METHODS

We generated annual practice-level counts of referrals across the first 4 years of the programme (June 2016 to March 2020). These were linked to 15 indicators of practice clinical quality, access and resources measured during 2018/19. We used random effects Poisson regressions to examine associations between referrals and these indicators, controlling for practice and population characteristics, for 6871 practices in England.

RESULTS

On average, practices made 3.72 referrals per 1000 population annually and rates varied substantially between practices. Referral rates were positively associated with the quality of clinical care provided. A 1 SD higher level of achievement on Quality and Outcomes Framework diabetes indicators was associated with an 11% (95% CI: 8% to 14%) higher referral rate. This positive association was consistent across all five clinical quality indicators. There was no association between referral rates and accessibility, overall payments or staffing. Associations between referrals and receiving different supplementary payments over the core contract were mixed, with 8%-11% lower referral rates for some payments but not for others.

CONCLUSION

Recruiting patients to diabetes prevention programmes via primary care reinforces existing inequalities between general practices in the clinical quality of care they provide. This leaves patients registered with practices providing lower quality clinical care even more disadvantaged. Providing additional support to lower quality practices or using alternative recruitment methods may be necessary to avoid differential engagement in prevention programmes from widening these variations and potential health inequalities further.

Implementing primary care diabetes prevention for women with previous gestational diabetes: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

The implementation of diabetes prevention for women with previous gestational diabetes (GDM) has been stymied by many barriers that are located within routine general practice (GP). We aimed to unpack the GP factors and understand the mechanisms that explain why a diabetes prevention intervention for this population succeeds or fails.

METHODS

We performed a mixed-methods study with a Normalization Process Theory framework that included clinical audits, semistructured interviews, and focus groups within mixed urban and rural primary care practices in Victoria, Australia. Staff of primary care practices and external support staff who provide services to women with previous GDM participated in a 12-month quality improvement collaborative intervention. We compared diabetes screening and prevention activity planning with the strategies and factors identified through a process evaluation of full-, moderate-, and low-active participating practices.

RESULTS

The intervention doubled screening rates (26%-61%) and 1-in-10 women received a diabetes prevention planning consultation. Critical improvement factors were: mothers being seen as participants in the quality improvement work; staff collectively building care strategies; staff taking a long-term care of a community perspective rather than episodic service delivery; and feedback processes being provided and acted on across the practice. The observable factors from the external perspective were: leadership by identified practice staff, reminder systems in action and practice staff driving the process collectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful engagement in diabetes prevention for women with previous GDM requires proactive building of the critical improvement factors and audit feedback into routine GP.

Delivering the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) in primary care: Experiences of healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVE

The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) used a formula total diet replacement programme followed by structured weight loss maintenance to induce and sustain weight loss and remission of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in 36% of participants after 2 years. Nurses and dietitians delivering DiRECT in 22 primary care practices in Tyneside and Scotland provided behavioural support to participants. Participant experiences with DiRECT highlighted the key role of support by healthcare professionals (HCPs). We evaluated HCPs' experiences with DiRECT.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Healthcare professionals delivering DiRECT were interviewed at 12 months, while general practices (GPs) were sent an implementation questionnaire. The interviews were analysed thematically. The questionnaires were analysed using frequencies and a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals representing 11 of 22 intervention practices were interviewed and 10 of 22 GPs completed questionnaires. HCPs' initial concerns over perceived potential negative intervention effects, particularly withdrawing anti-diabetes and anti-hypertensive medications, were barriers to engagement. Trust of HCPs towards the research team and perceived credibility of the study facilitated engagement and adoption. Ongoing support by research dietitians was key to the management of participants. Involvement in DiRECT inspired more focus on behaviour modification in the treatment of other people living with T2D in routine practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial was considered highly appropriate for the management of T2D in primary care when supported by trained dietitians. Addressing limitations, including varying training needs of HCPs may improve intervention scale-up and tailoring to clinical contexts.

'Finishing the race' - a cohort study of weight and blood glucose change among the first 36,000 patients in a large-scale diabetes prevention programme

Background

The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme for England, “Healthier You”, encourages behaviour change regarding healthy eating and physical exercise among people identified to be at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. The aim of this research was to examine change, and factors associated with change, in measures of HbA1c and weight in participants and completers of the programme between 2016 and 2019.

Methods

Participant-level data collected by programme service providers on referrals prior to March 2018 was analysed. Changes from baseline to both 6 months and completion in HbA1c and weight were examined using mixed effects linear regression, adjusting for patient characteristics, service provider and site.

Results

Completers had average improvements in HbA1c of 2.1 mmol/mol [95% CI: − 2.2, − 2.0] (0.19% [95% CI: − 0.20, − 0.18]) and reductions of 3.6 kg [95% CI: − 3.6, − 3.5] in weight, in absolute terms. Variation across the four providers was observed at both time points: two providers had significantly smaller average reductions in HbA1c and one provider had a significantly smaller average reduction in weight compared to the other providers. At both time points, ex- or current smokers had smaller reductions in HbA1c than non-smokers and those from minority ethnic groups lost less weight than White participants. For both outcomes, associations with other factors were small or null and variation across sites remained after adjustment for provider and case mix.

Conclusions

Participants who completed the programme, on average, experienced improvements in weight and HbA1c. There was substantial variation in HbA1c change and smaller variation in weight loss between providers and across different sites. Aside from an association between HbA1c change and smoking, and between weight loss and ethnicity, results were broadly similar regardless of patient characteristics.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-022-01249-5.

How is the Behavior Change Technique Content of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Program Understood by Participants? A Qualitative Study of Fidelity, With a Focus on Receipt

Background

The National Health Service (NHS) Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) is a nationally implemented behavioral intervention for adults at high risk of developing Type 2 diabetes in England, based on a program specification that stipulates inclusion of 19 specific behavior change techniques (BCTs). Previous work has identified drift in fidelity from these NHS England specifications through providers’ program manuals, training, and delivery, especially in relation to BCTs targeting self-regulatory processes.

Purpose

This qualitative study investigates intervention receipt, i.e., how the self-regulatory BCT content of the NHS-DPP is understood by participants.

Methods

Twenty participants from eight NHS-DPP locations were interviewed; topics included participants’ understanding of self-monitoring of behavior, goal setting, feedback, problem solving, and action planning. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using the framework method.

Results

There was a wide variation in understanding among participants for some BCTs, as well as between BCTs. Participants described their understanding of “self-monitoring of behaviors” with ease and valued BCTs focused on outcomes (weight loss). Some participants learned how to set appropriate behavioral goals. Participants struggled to recall “action planning” or “problem solving” or found these techniques challenging to understand, unless additional support was provided (e.g., through group discussion).

Conclusions

Participants’ lack of understanding of some self-regulatory BCTs is consistent with the drift across fidelity domains previously identified from NHS design specifications. Behavioral interventions should build-in necessary support for participants to help them understand some BCTs such as action planning and problem solving. Alternatively, these self-regulatory BCTs may be intrinsically difficult to use for this population.

Choice of HbA1c threshold for identifying individuals at high risk of type 2 diabetes and implications for diabetes prevention programmes: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is common and increasing in prevalence. It is possible to prevent or delay T2D using lifestyle intervention programmes. Entry to these programmes is usually determined by a measure of glycaemia in the 'intermediate' range. This paper investigated the relationship between HbA1c and future diabetes risk and determined the impact of varying thresholds to identify those at high risk of developing T2D.

METHODS

We studied 4227 participants without diabetes aged ≥ 40 years recruited to the Exeter 10,000 population cohort in South West England. HbA1c was measured at study recruitment with repeat HbA1c available as part of usual care. Absolute risk of developing diabetes within 5 years, defined by HbA1c ≥ 48 mmol/mol (6.5%), according to baseline HbA1c, was assessed by a flexible parametric survival model.

RESULTS

The overall absolute 5-year risk (95% CI) of developing T2D in the cohort was 4.2% (3.6, 4.8%). This rose to 7.1% (6.1, 8.2%) in the 56% (n = 2358/4224) of participants classified 'high-risk' with HbA1c ≥ 39 mmol/mol (5.7%; ADA criteria). Under IEC criteria, HbA1c ≥ 42 mmol/mol (6.0%), 22% (n = 929/4277) of the cohort was classified high-risk with 5-year risk 14.9% (12.6, 17.2%). Those with the highest HbA1c values (44-47 mmol/mol [6.2-6.4%]) had much higher 5-year risk, 26.4% (22.0, 30.5%) compared with 2.1% (1.5, 2.6%) for 39-41 mmol/mol (5.7-5.9%) and 7.0% (5.4, 8.6%) for 42-43 mmol/mol (6.0-6.1%). Changing the entry criterion to prevention programmes from 39 to 42 mmol/mol (5.7-6.0%) reduced the proportion classified high-risk by 61%, and increased the positive predictive value (PPV) from 5.8 to 12.4% with negligible impact on the negative predictive value (NPV), 99.6% to 99.1%. Increasing the threshold further, to 44 mmol/mol (6.2%), reduced those classified high-risk by 59%, and markedly increased the PPV from 12.4 to 23.2% and had little impact on the NPV (99.1% to 98.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of people are identified as high-risk using current thresholds. Increasing the risk threshold markedly reduces the number of people that would be classified as high-risk and entered into prevention programmes, although this must be balanced against cases missed. Raising the entry threshold would allow limited intervention opportunities to be focused on those most likely to develop T2D.

The effects of structure, process and outcome incentives on primary care referrals to a national prevention programme

Despite widespread use, evidence is sparse on whether financial incentives in healthcare should be linked to structure, process or outcome. We examine the impact of different incentive types on the quantity and effectiveness of referrals made by general practices to a new national prevention programme in England. We measured effectiveness by the number of referrals resulting in programme attendance. We surveyed local commissioners about their use of financial incentives and linked this information to numbers of programme referrals and attendances from 5170 general practices between April 2016 and March 2018. We used multivariate probit regressions to identify commissioner characteristics associated with the use of different incentive types and negative binomial regressions to estimate their effect on practice rates of referral and attendance. Financial incentives were offered by commissioners in the majority of areas (89%), with 38% using structure incentives, 69% using process incentives and 22% using outcome incentives. Compared to practices without financial incentives, neither structure nor process incentives were associated with statistically significant increases in referrals or attendances, but outcome incentives were associated with 84% more referrals and 93% more attendances. Outcome incentives were the only form of pay-for-performance to stimulate more participation in this national disease prevention programme.

Implementation science should give higher priority to health equity

Background

There is growing urgency to tackle issues of equity and justice in the USA and worldwide. Health equity, a framing that moves away from a deficit mindset of what society is doing poorly (disparities) to one that is positive about what society can achieve, is becoming more prominent in health research that uses implementation science approaches. Equity begins with justice—health differences often reflect societal injustices. Applying the perspectives and tools of implementation science has potential for immediate impact to improve health equity.

Main text

We propose a vision and set of action steps for making health equity a more prominent and central aim of implementation science, thus committing to conduct implementation science through equity-focused principles to achieve this vision in U.S. research and practice. We identify and discuss challenges in current health disparities approaches that do not fully consider social determinants. Implementation research challenges are outlined in three areas: limitations of the evidence base, underdeveloped measures and methods, and inadequate attention to context. To address these challenges, we offer recommendations that seek to (1) link social determinants with health outcomes, (2) build equity into all policies, (3) use equity-relevant metrics, (4) study what is already happening, (5) integrate equity into implementation models, (6) design and tailor implementation strategies, (7) connect to systems and sectors outside of health, (8) engage organizations in internal and external equity efforts, (9) build capacity for equity in implementation science, and (10) focus on equity in dissemination efforts.

Conclusions

Every project in implementation science should include an equity focus. For some studies, equity is the main goal of the project and a central feature of all aspects of the project. In other studies, equity is part of a project but not the singular focus. In these studies, we should, at a minimum, ensure that we “leave no one behind” and that existing disparities are not widened. With a stronger commitment to health equity from funders, researchers, practitioners, advocates, evaluators, and policy makers, we can harvest the rewards of the resources being invested in health-related research to eliminate disparities, resulting in health equity.

Early economic evaluation of an intervention to improve uptake of the NHS England Diabetes Prevention Programme

BACKGROUND

Despite reported increases in referral numbers, a large proportion of those with prediabetes still decline participation in the NHS England Diabetes Prevention Programme (NDPP). The aim of this study was to explore whether investment in interventions to improve uptake of the programme has the potential to be cost-effective.

METHODS

An early cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov model parameterized based on secondary data sources. We explored different uptake scenarios and the impact that this had on the maximum allowable intervention price based on cost-effectiveness at the UK NICE willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 (US$ 25,913). Value of information analyses were conducted to explore the potential value of further research to resolve uncertainty at each uptake level.

RESULTS

As uptake levels increase, the maximum allowable intervention price and overall expected value of removing decision uncertainty increases. For 5 percentage and 50 percentage points increase in uptake levels, the maximum allowable intervention price is £41.86 (US$ 54.23) and £418.59 (US$ 542.34) per person, and the overall expected value of removing decision uncertainty are £361,818,839 (US$ 468,786,625) and £1,468,712,316 (US$ 1,902,921,063) respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is headroom for investment in interventions that improve uptake to the NDPP, thereby allowing the programme itself to be delivered in a manner that remains cost-effective.

A theory of planned behavior-enhanced intervention to promote health literacy and self-care behaviors of type 2 diabetic patients

Background

Improved health literacy and awareness could help type 2 diabetic patients to control the disease complications.

Objective

The current study aimed to evaluate the impact of theory-based educational intervention on health literacy and self-care behaviors of type 2 diabetic patients in Tonekabon city.

Methods

This randomized controlled trial study was conducted at health care centers in Tonekabon city, Iran, from April 5, 2017, to October 22, 2018. Using multistage random sampling, 166 patients with type 2 diabetes divided into two groups: theory-based intervention (n = 83) and custom education (n = 83). The data collection tools consisted of demographic information, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) measures, health literacy for Iranian adults (HELIA) and summary of diabetes self-care activities (SDSCA). The five 45-minute group training sessions based on the baseline assessment and model constructs along with the targeted pamphlet and m-health strategy were designed for the experimental group. Data were analyzed using chi-square, independent and paired t-test and Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

Results

After controlling for pre-test effect, there was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of mean scores of attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavior control and intention in post-test (P < 0.001). Also, after controlling for the pre-test effect, the results showed a significant difference in the self-care domain in the post-test (P < 0.001). Finally, after controlling for the pre-test variable effect, covariance analysis reflects significant difference in total health literacy score and its dimension at posttest (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Applying TPB based education is suggested to maintain and improve self-care behaviors and health literacy in type 2 diabetic patients and other chronic diseases.

'Going the distance': an independent cohort study of engagement and dropout among the first 100 000 referrals into a large-scale diabetes prevention program

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes prevention programs (DPPs) are effective, in a pre-diabetic population, in reducing weight, lowering glycated hemoglobin and slowing the progression to diabetes. Little is known about the relationship between participation in DPPsand participant characteristics or service delivery. We investigated uptake and retention in England's NHS DPP, reporting on variability among patient subgroups, providers, and sites.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 99 473 adults with non-diabetic hyperglycemia referred to the English DPP between 2016 and 2017. The program seeks to change health behaviors by offering at least 16 hours of group education and exercise. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to analyze variation in uptake, retention, and completion.

RESULTS

Uptake among 99 473 adults referred to the program was 56% (55 275). Among 55 275 who started the program, 34% (18 562) achieved the required dose and 22% (12 127) completed the full course. After adjustment for variation in case mix, substantial heterogeneity in uptake and retention was seen across four service providers (uptake OR 1.77 (1.33, 2.34), 4.30 (3.01, 6.15), and 1.45 (1.07, 1.97) compared with the reference provider) and between sites (uptake for typical individuals ranged from 0.32 to 0.78 across the middle 95% of sites, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.07). Higher levels of retention and completion were seen where some out-of-hours provision was offered (retention OR 1.32 (1.25, 1.39)).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the first independent assessment of participation in the English DPP and the first study internationally to examine the impact of DPP service delivery on participation. When implementing a large-scale DPP, heterogeneity in service provision between different providers and sites can result in variable participation beyond that attributable to case mix, with potential consequences for effectiveness and health inequalities. Extending out-of-hours provision may improve participation in prevention programs.