Material Need Support Interventions for Diabetes Prevention and Control: a Systematic Review

Barnard, Lily S.; Wexler, Deborah J.; DeWalt, Darren A.; Berkowitz, Seth A.

doi:10.1007/s11892-014-0574-1

Cited by 64 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5,10 Pathways for interventions aimed at improving health outcomes may exist beyond improving the nutrition of food available to individuals, but currently the majority of interventions in food insecure populations have focused on this pathway. 34 This study suggests that a focus on nutrition alone will not address the needs of individuals with diabetes, and recommends additional pathways be targeted with future interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…A better understanding of the factors that lead to poor outcomes can inform more targeted support interventions to address individuals with food insecurity. 34 Current intervention efforts have focused on decreasing the cost of fresh vegetables and improving the diet quality of food insecure patients. 9 While programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and emergency food banks can be effective at increasing food availability, some individuals may not be eligible and the food choices available may not be ideal for those with diabetes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pathways between food insecurity and glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes

Walker

Williams

Egede

2018

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Food insecurity is reported in approximately 28% of individuals with diabetes in the US, and is associated with poor glycemic and lipid control. The aim of this study was to understand the direct and indirect pathways through which food insecurity impacts glycemic control in individuals with diabetes. Methods 615 adults with type 2 diabetes completed validated questionnaires after recruitment from two primary care clinics. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to investigate mechanisms through which food insecurity influences diabetes self-care behaviors and glycemic control, including investigation into possible direct and indirect effects of perceived stress and social support. Results The final model showed that higher food insecurity was directly significantly related to increased stress (r= 0.14, p<0.001) and increased HbA1c (r= 0.66, p=0.03). Higher stress was significantly related to poorer self-care (r= −0.54, p<0.001), and lower social support (r= −0.41, p<0.001). There was no significant direct association between food insecurity and self-care, or between perceived stress and glycemic control. Conclusions Food insecurity had both a direct effect on glycemic control, and an indirect effect on self-care through stress. The indirect pathway suggests efforts to address stress may influence the ability of individuals to perform diabetes self-care behaviors. The direct effect on glycemic control suggests pathways independent of self-care behaviors may also be necessary to improve diabetes outcomes. Results from this study suggest a multi-pronged approach is necessary to address food insecurity in individuals with diabetes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathways between food insecurity and glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes

Walker

Williams

Egede

2018

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(49) Food insecurity is reported in approximately 20% of patients with diabetes, and has been linked to poor glycemic control, possibly due to difficulty following an appropriate diet or increased distress. (50,51) In an analysis considering a variety of neighborhood factors together, food insecurity and neighborhood activities had independent associations with multiple self-care behaviors. (52) Social cohesion was the only neighborhood characteristic with an independent association with glycemic control after controlling for relevant sociodemographic and clinical factors.…”

Section: Neighborhood Factors and Diabetesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Race, Ethnicity and Social Determinants of Health on Diabetes Outcomes

Walker

Williams

Egede

2016

The American Journal of the Medical Sciences

352

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is strong evidence that race/ethnicity and social determinants of health significantly impact outcomes for patients with diabetes. A better understanding of the mechanisms of these relationships/associations will improve development of cost-effective, culturally tailored programs for patients with diabetes. This article reviews the current state of the literature on the impact of race/ethnicity and social determinants of health on process of care, quality of care and outcomes for diabetes, with particular emphasis on the rural South to give an overview of the state of the literature. The literature review shows that racial/ethnic differences in the clinical outcomes for diabetes, including glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control, continue to persist. In addition, the literature review shows that the role of social determinants of health on outcomes, and the possible role these determinants play in disparities have largely been ignored. Psychosocial factors, such as self-efficacy, depression, social support, and perceived stress, show consistent associations with self-care, quality of life, and glycemic control. Neighborhood factors, such as food insecurity, social cohesion, and neighborhood aesthetics have been associated with glycemic control. Perceived discrimination has also been associated with self-care and the psychological component of quality of life. Health care professionals need to be skilled in assessing social determinants of health and taking them into consideration in clinical care. In addition, more research is needed to identify the separate and combined impact of race/ethnicity and social determinants of health on process of care, quality of care and outcomes in diabetes, especially in the South, where the burden of disease is particularly high.

show abstract

“…Individuals living in socioeconomically disadvantaged circumstances are at increased risk of developing chronic medical conditions, face greater barriers to successful disease management, and experience higher rates of both emergency department utilization and inpatient hospital admissions. [1][2][3][4][5][6] Recognizing the importance of social determinants of health (SDH) to health outcomes, utilization, and costs, the National Academy of Medicine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have all called for evidencebased initiatives to better screen for and address SDHs in clinical settings. [7][8][9] While growing evidence informs instruments used to screen for SDH, 10 -16 little is known about current screening practices for SDH in clinical settings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for Social Determinants of Health in Michigan Health Centers

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Through an academic-community partnership with a statewide consortium of health centers (HCs) in Michigan, we characterize the current scope of screening for social determinants of health (SDH).Methods: We requested copies of forms used to screen for SDH at the 39 HC organizations in Michigan. Using content analysis, we examined variation in screening domains and processes. We present descriptive analyses of HC characteristics and patient demographics.Results: We received screening documentation from 23 of the 39 HCs (59%), representing 167 delivery sites. We found broad empiric consensus regarding a core set of 13 SDH screening domains that align with nationally recommended screening guidelines. Two additional domains, Culture and Functional Status, were screened for by <40% of HCs. While patient self-report is the most frequent mode of SDH screening (41%), many HCs use staff members to administer the screening documents.Conclusions: HCs across a large and diverse state are screening for SDH and largely agree on core SDH screening domains. Using existing empiric data from frontline providers can inform potential best practices in SDH screening. (J Am Board Fam Med 2017;30:418 -427.)

show abstract

Material Need Support Interventions for Diabetes Prevention and Control: a Systematic Review

Cited by 64 publications

References 66 publications

Pathways between food insecurity and glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes

Pathways between food insecurity and glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes

Influence of Race, Ethnicity and Social Determinants of Health on Diabetes Outcomes

Screening for Social Determinants of Health in Michigan Health Centers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About