A Randomized Controlled Trial of Financial Incentives for Medicaid Beneficiaries with Diabetes

Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of medically tailored meals compared to usual care among individuals with type 2 diabetes in Australia

BACKGROUND

'Food is medicine' strategies aim to integrate food-based nutrition interventions into healthcare systems and are of growing interest to healthcare providers and policy makers. 'Medically Tailored Meals' (MTM) is one such intervention, which involves the 'prescription' by healthcare providers of subsidized, pre-prepared meals for individuals to prevent or manage chronic conditions, combined with nutrition education.

OBJECTIVE

This study will test the efficacy of an MTM program in Australia among participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hyperglycemia, who experience difficulties accessing and eating nutritious food.

METHODS

This study will be a two-arm parallel trial (goal n = 212) with individuals randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a MTM intervention group or a control group (106 per arm). Over 26 weeks, the intervention group will be prescribed 20 MTM per fortnight and up to 3 sessions with an accredited dietitian. Controls will continue with their usual care. The primary outcome is glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c, %) and secondary outcomes include differences in blood pressure, blood lipids and weight, all measured at 26 weeks. Process and economic data will be analyzed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Recruitment commenced in the first quarter of 2023, with analyses and results anticipated to be available by March 2025.

DISCUSSION

Few randomized controlled trials have assessed the impact of MTM on clinical outcomes. This Australian-first trial will generate robust data to inform the case for sustained, large-scale implementation of MTM to improve the management of T2D among vulnerable populations.

ANZCTR

ACTRN12622000852752.

PROTOCOL VERSION

Version 1.1, July 2023.

Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes

BACKGROUND

There is a large body of evidence evaluating quality improvement (QI) programmes to improve care for adults living with diabetes. These programmes are often comprised of multiple QI strategies, which may be implemented in various combinations. Decision-makers planning to implement or evaluate a new QI programme, or both, need reliable evidence on the relative effectiveness of different QI strategies (individually and in combination) for different patient populations.

OBJECTIVES

To update existing systematic reviews of diabetes QI programmes and apply novel meta-analytical techniques to estimate the effectiveness of QI strategies (individually and in combination) on diabetes quality of care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL) and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) to 4 June 2019. We conducted a top-up search to 23 September 2021; we screened these search results and 42 studies meeting our eligibility criteria are available in the awaiting classification section.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that assessed a QI programme to improve care in outpatient settings for people living with diabetes. QI programmes needed to evaluate at least one system- or provider-targeted QI strategy alone or in combination with a patient-targeted strategy. - System-targeted: case management (CM); team changes (TC); electronic patient registry (EPR); facilitated relay of clinical information (FR); continuous quality improvement (CQI). - Provider-targeted: audit and feedback (AF); clinician education (CE); clinician reminders (CR); financial incentives (FI). - Patient-targeted: patient education (PE); promotion of self-management (PSM); patient reminders (PR). Patient-targeted QI strategies needed to occur with a minimum of one provider or system-targeted strategy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We dual-screened search results and abstracted data on study design, study population and QI strategies. We assessed the impact of the programmes on 13 measures of diabetes care, including: glycaemic control (e.g. mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)); cardiovascular risk factor management (e.g. mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), proportion of people living with diabetes that quit smoking or receiving cardiovascular medications); and screening/prevention of microvascular complications (e.g. proportion of patients receiving retinopathy or foot screening); and harms (e.g. proportion of patients experiencing adverse hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia). We modelled the association of each QI strategy with outcomes using a series of hierarchical multivariable meta-regression models in a Bayesian framework. The previous version of this review identified that different strategies were more or less effective depending on baseline levels of outcomes. To explore this further, we extended the main additive model for continuous outcomes (HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C) to include an interaction term between each strategy and average baseline risk for each study (baseline thresholds were based on a data-driven approach; we used the median of all baseline values reported in the trials). Based on model diagnostics, the baseline interaction models for HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C performed better than the main model and are therefore presented as the primary analyses for these outcomes. Based on the model results, we qualitatively ordered each QI strategy within three tiers (Top, Middle, Bottom) based on its magnitude of effect relative to the other QI strategies, where 'Top' indicates that the QI strategy was likely one of the most effective strategies for that specific outcome. Secondary analyses explored the sensitivity of results to choices in model specification and priors.  Additional information about the methods and results of the review are available as Appendices in an online repository. This review will be maintained as a living systematic review; we will update our syntheses as more data become available.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 553 trials (428 patient-randomised and 125 cluster-randomised trials), including a total of 412,161 participants. Of the included studies, 66% involved people living with type 2 diabetes only. Participants were 50% female and the median age of participants was 58.4 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 12.5 months. HbA1c was the commonest reported outcome; screening outcomes and outcomes related to cardiovascular medications, smoking and harms were reported infrequently. The most frequently evaluated QI strategies across all study arms were PE, PSM and CM, while the least frequently evaluated QI strategies included AF, FI and CQI. Our confidence in the evidence is limited due to a lack of information on how studies were conducted.  Four QI strategies (CM, TC, PE, PSM) were consistently identified as 'Top' across the majority of outcomes. All QI strategies were ranked as 'Top' for at least one key outcome. The majority of effects of individual QI strategies were modest, but when used in combination could result in meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. The median number of QI strategies in multicomponent QI programmes was three.  Combinations of the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to the below effects:  - PR + PSM + CE: decrease in HbA1c by 0.41% (credibility interval (CrI) -0.61 to -0.22) when baseline HbA1c < 8.3%; - CM + PE + EPR: decrease in HbA1c by 0.62% (CrI -0.84 to -0.39) when baseline HbA1c > 8.3%;  - PE + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 2.14 mmHg (CrI -3.80 to -0.52) when baseline SBP < 136 mmHg; - CM + TC + PSM: reduction in SBP by 4.39 mmHg (CrI -6.20 to -2.56) when baseline SBP > 136 mmHg;  - TC + PE + CM: LDL-C lowering of 5.73 mg/dL (CrI -7.93 to -3.61) when baseline LDL < 107 mg/dL; - TC + CM + CR: LDL-C lowering by 5.52 mg/dL (CrI -9.24 to -1.89) when baseline LDL > 107 mg/dL. Assuming a baseline screening rate of 50%, the three most effective QI strategies were estimated to lead to an absolute improvement of 33% in retinopathy screening (PE + PR + TC) and 38% absolute increase in foot screening (PE + TC + Other).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant body of evidence about QI programmes to improve the management of diabetes. Multicomponent QI programmes for diabetes care (comprised of effective QI strategies) may achieve meaningful population-level improvements across the majority of outcomes. For health system decision-makers, the evidence summarised in this review can be used to identify strategies to include in QI programmes. For researchers, this synthesis identifies higher-priority QI strategies to examine in further research regarding how to optimise their evaluation and effects. We will maintain this as a living systematic review.

Interventions for Adherence Improvement in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases: Expert Consensus Statement

Over the last 2 decades, the management of chronic disease in Korea has been improved, but it has gradually stagnated. In order to improve care and reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, it is crucial to improve primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. In recent international guidelines for hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and other conditions, adherence issues have become more frequently addressed. However, in terms of implementation in practice, separate approaches by dozens of related academic specialties need to be integrated into a systematic approach including clinician’s perspectives such as the science behind adherence, clinical skills, and interaction within team approach.

In primary prevention for cardiovascular diseases, there are significant barriers to adherence including freedom from symptoms, long latency for therapeutic benefits, life-long duration of treatment, and need for combined lifestyle changes. However, to implement more systematic approaches, the focus on adherence improvement needs to be shifted away from patient factors to the effects of the treatment team and healthcare system. In addition to conventional educational approaches, more patient-oriented approaches such as patient-centered clinical communication skills, counseling using motivational strategies, decision-making by patient empowerment, and a multi-disciplinary team approach should be developed and implemented. Patients should be involved in a program of self-monitoring, self-management, and active counseling. Because most effective interventions on adherence improvement demand greater resources, the health care system and educational or training system of physicians and healthcare staff need to be supported for systematic improvement.

A Digital Health Intervention (SweetGoals) for Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Protocol for a Factorial Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Many young adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) struggle with the complex daily demands of adherence to their medical regimen and fail to achieve target range glycemic control. Few interventions, however, have been developed specifically for this age group.

OBJECTIVE

In this randomized trial, we will provide a mobile app (SweetGoals) to all participants as a "core" intervention. The app prompts participants to upload data from their diabetes devices weekly to a device-agnostic uploader (Glooko), automatically retrieves uploaded data, assesses daily and weekly self-management goals, and generates feedback messages about goal attainment. Further, the trial will test two unique intervention components: (1) incentives to promote consistent daily adherence to goals, and (2) web health coaching to teach effective problem solving focused on personalized barriers to self-management. We will use a novel digital direct-to-patient recruitment method and intervention delivery model that transcends the clinic.

METHODS

A 2x2 factorial randomized trial will be conducted with 300 young adults ages 19-25 with type 1 diabetes and (Hb)A_1c ≥ 8.0%. All participants will receive the SweetGoals app that tracks and provides feedback about two adherence targets: (a) daily glucose monitoring; and (b) mealtime behaviors. Participants will be randomized to the factorial combination of incentives and health coaching. The intervention will last 6 months. The primary outcome will be reduction in A_1c. Secondary outcomes include self-regulation mechanisms in longitudinal mediation models and engagement metrics as a predictor of outcomes. Participants will complete 6- and 12-month follow-up assessments. We hypothesize greater sustained A_1c improvements in participants who receive coaching and who receive incentives compared to those who do not receive those components.

RESULTS

Data collection is expected to be complete by February 2025. Analyses of primary and secondary outcomes are expected by December 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful completion of these aims will support dissemination and effectiveness studies of this intervention that seeks to improve glycemic control in this high-risk and understudied population of young adults with T1D.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04646473; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04646473.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/27109.

Process- and Outcome-Based Financial Incentives to Improve Self-Management and Glycemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes in Singapore: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Sub-optimally controlled diabetes increases risks for adverse and costly complications. Self-management including glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and exercise are key for optimal glycemic control, yet, poor self-management remains common.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of the Trial to Incentivize Adherence for Diabetes (TRIAD) study was to determine the effectiveness of financial incentives in improving glycemic control among type 2 diabetes patients in Singapore, and to test whether process-based incentives tied to glucose monitoring, medication adherence, and physical activity are more effective than outcome-based incentives tied to achieving normal glucose readings.

METHODS

TRIAD is a randomized, controlled, multi-center superiority trial. A total of 240 participants who had at least one recent glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) being 8.0% or more and on oral diabetes medication were recruited from two polyclinics. They were block-randomized (blocking factor: current vs. new glucometer users) into the usual care plus (UC +) arm, process-based incentive arm, and outcome-based incentive arm in a 2:3:3 ratio. The primary outcome was the mean change in HbA1c at month 6 and was linearly regressed on binary variables indicating the intervention arms, baseline HbA1c levels, a binary variable indicating titration change, and other baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Our findings show that the combined incentive arms trended toward better HbA1c than UC + , but the difference is estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.67 to 0.06). Lending credibility to this result, the proportion of participants who reduced their HbA1c is higher in the combined incentive arms relative to UC + (0.18; 95% CI 0.04, 0.31). We found a small improvement in process- relative to outcome-based incentives, but this was again estimated with great uncertainty (difference - 0.05; 95% CI - 0.42 to 0.31). Consistent with this improvement, process-based incentives were more effective at improving weekly medication adherent days (0.64; 95% CI - 0.04 to 1.32), weekly physically active days (1.37; 95% CI 0.60-2.13), and quality of life (0.04; 95% CI 0.0-0.07) than outcome-based incentives.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that both incentive types may be part of a successful self-management strategy. Process-based incentives can improve adherence to intermediary outcomes, while outcome-based incentives focus on glycemic control and are simpler to administer.

Financial incentives to improve glycemic control in African American adults with type 2 diabetes: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background

Financial incentives is emerging as a viable strategy for improving clinical outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes. However, there is limited data on optimal structure for financial incentives and whether financial incentives are effective in African Americans with type 2 diabetes. This pilot study evaluated impact of three financial incentive structures on glycemic control in this population.

Methods

Sixty adults with type 2 diabetes were randomized to one of three financial incentive structures: 1) single incentive (Group 1) at 3 months for Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduction, 2) two-part equal incentive (Group 2) for home testing of glucose and HbA1c reduction at 3 months, and 3) three-part equal incentive (Group 3) for home testing, attendance of weekly telephone education classes and HbA1c reduction at 3 months. The primary outcome was HbA1c reduction within each group at 3 months post-randomization. Paired t-tests were used to test differences between baseline and 3-month HbA1c within each group.

Results

The mean age for the sample was 57.9 years and 71.9% were women. Each incentive structure led to significant reductions in HbA1c at 3 months with the greatest reduction from baseline in the group with incentives for multiple components: Group 1 mean reduction = 1.25, Group 2 mean reduction = 1.73, Group 3 mean reduction = 1.74.

Conclusion

Financial incentives led to significant reductions in HbA1c from baseline within each group. Incentives for multiple components led to the greatest reductions from baseline. Structured financial incentives that reward home monitoring, attendance of telephone education sessions, and lifestyle modification to lower HbA1c are viable options for glycemic control in African Americans with type 2 diabetes.

Trial registration

Trial registration: NCT02722499. Registered 23 March 2016, url.

Dietary policies and programs in the United States: A narrative review

•

School-based and youth targeted programs and policies were most frequently studied.

•

Research has rather neglected older adult, Asian, Native Hawaiian and American Indian populations.

•

Despite existing research indicating effectiveness, faith-based were understudied.

Prior reviews describing approach, methodological quality and effectiveness of dietary policies and programs may be limited in use for practitioners seeking to introduce innovative programming, or academic researchers hoping to understand and address gaps in the current literature. This review is novel, assessing the “where, who, and in whom” of dietary policies and programs research in the United States over the past decade – with results intended to serve as a practical guide and foundation for innovation. This study was conducted from October 2018 to March 2019. Papers were selected through a tailored search strategy on PubMed as well as citation searches, to identify grey literature. A total of 489 papers were relevant to our research objective. The largest proportion of papers described school-based strategies (31%) or included economic incentives (19%). In papers that specified demographics, the study populations most often included children, adults and adolescents (54%, 46%, and 42% respectively); and White, Black and Hispanic populations (77%, 76% and 70%, respectively). Results highlight opportunities for future research within workplace and faith-based settings, among racial/ethnic minorities, and older adults.

Assessment of Rwandan diabetic patients' needs and expectations to develop their first diabetes self-management smartphone application (Kir'App)

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of and coping with diabetes is still poor in some communities in Rwanda. While smartphone applications (or apps) have demonstrated improving diabetes self-care, there is no current study on the use of smartphones in the self-management of diabetes in Rwanda.

METHODS

The main objective of this study was to assess the needs and expectations of Rwandan diabetic patients for mobile-health-supported diabetes self-management in order to develop a patient-centred smartphone application (Kir'App).

RESULTS

Convenience sampling was used to recruit study participants at the Rwanda Diabetes Association. Twenty-one patients participated in semi-structured, in-depth, face-to-face interviews. Thematic analysis was performed using Mayring's method of qualitative content analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The study included 21 participants with either type 1 (female = 5, male = 6) or type 2 (female = 6, male = 4) diabetes. Participants' age ranged from 18 to 69 years with a mean age of 35 and 29 years, respectively. Eight main themes were identified. These were (a) diabetes education and desired information provision; (b) lack of diabetes knowledge and awareness; (c) need for information in crisis situations; (d) required monitoring and reminder functions; (e) information on nutrition and alcohol consumption; (f) information on physical activity; (g) coping with burden of disease, through social support and network; (h) app features. This study provides recommendations that will be used to design the features of the first Rwandan diabetes self-management smartphone application (Kir'App). The future impact of the application on the Rwandan diabetic patients' self-management capacity and quality of life will be evaluated afterwards.

Impact of Financial Incentives on Health Outcomes and Costs of Care among Medicaid Beneficiaries with Diabetes in Hawai'i

The Hawai'i Patient Reward And Incentives to Support Empowerment (HI-PRAISE) project, part of the Medicaid Incentives for Prevention of Chronic Diseases program of the Affordable Care Act, examined the impact of financial incentives on Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes. It included an observational pre-post study which was conducted at nine Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) between 2013 to 2015. The observational study enrolled 2,003 participants. Participants could earn up to $320/year in financial incentives. Primary outcomes were change in hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure, and cholesterol; secondary outcomes included compliance with American Diabetes Association (ADA) standards of diabetes care and cost effectiveness. Generalized estimating equation models were used to assess differences in clinical outcomes and general linear models were utilized to estimate the medical costs per patient/day. Changes in clinical outcomes in the observational study were statistically significant: mean hemoglobin A1c decreased from 8.56% to 8.24% (P < .0001); mean systolic blood pressure decreased from 125.16 to 124.18 mm Hg (P = .0137); mean diastolic blood pressure decreased from 75.54 to 74.78 mm Hg (P = .0005); total cholesterol decreased from 180.77 to 174.21 mg/dl (P < .0001); and low-density lipoprotein decreased from 106.17 to 98.55 mg/dl (P < .0001). Improved ADA compliance was also observed. A key limitation was a reduced sample size due to participant's fluctuating Medicaid eligibility status. HI-PRAISE showed no reduction in total health cost during the project period.