Shiela M Strauss

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine diabetes illness perceptions among a sample of at-risk adults according to specific characteristics that make them vulnerable to diabetes. At-risk adults (N = 372) participated in a study investigating the potential to screen them for diabetes at a large urban dental college. Sociodemographic and individual-level diabetes risk-related characteristics, A1C measures, diabetes-related symptoms, diabetes knowledge, diabetes illness perceptions, and perceived causes of diabetes were collected and reported for the study sample; t tests were then used to determine whether there were statistically significant differences in each of 8 dimensions of diabetes illness perceptions according to the presence or absence of 6 diabetes risk factors. Average A1C values were 5.6% (38 mmol/mol), and 46% of the study sample had A1C values in the prediabetes or diabetes range. Participants had various diabetes knowledge gaps and misperceptions, and there were differences in dimensions of diabetes illness perceptions depending on specific diabetes-related risk factors. In view of differences in the diabetes-related illness perceptions of persons at risk for diabetes, it is important for diabetes educators and other health care providers to personalize their diabetes-related education, management, and support to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of at-risk patients.

Abstract

Objective: To validate an ion exchange high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method for measuring glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in gingival crevicular blood (GCB) spotted on filter paper, for use in screening dental patients for diabetes. Methods: We collected the GCB specimens for this study from the oral cavities of patients during dental visits, using rigorous strategies to obtain GCB that was as free of debris as possible. The analytical performance of the HPLC method was determined by measuring the precision, linearity, carryover, stability of HbA1c in GCB, and correlation of HbA1c results in GCB specimens with finger-stick blood (FSB) specimens spotted on filter paper. Results: The coefficients of variation (CVs) for the inter- and intrarun precision of the method were less than 2.0%. Linearity ranged between 4.2% and 12.4%; carryover was less than 2.0%, and the stability of the specimen was 6 days at 4°C and as many as 14 days at -70°C. Linear regression analysis comparing the HbA1c results in GCB with FSB yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.993, a slope of 0.981, and an intercept of 0.13. The Bland-Altman plot showed no difference in the HbA1c results from the GCB and FSB specimens at normal, prediabetes, and diabetes HbA1c levels. Conclusion: We validated an HPLC method for measuring HbA1c in GCB; this method can be used to screen dental patients for diabetes.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Panel Management can expand prevention and chronic illness management beyond the office visit, but there is limited evidence for its effectiveness or guidance on how best to incorporate it into practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to test the effectiveness of incorporating panel management into clinical practice by incorporating Panel Management Assistants (PMAs) into primary care teams with and without panel management education. DESIGN: We conducted an 8-month cluster-randomized controlled trial of panel management for improving hypertension and smoking cessation outcomes among veterans. PATRICIPANTS: Twenty primary care teams from the Veterans Affairs New York Harbor were randomized to control, panel management support, or panel management support plus education groups. Teams included 69 clinical staff serving 8,153 hypertensive and/or smoking veterans. INTERVENTIONS: Teams assigned to the intervention groups worked with non-clinical Panel Management Assistants (PMAs) who monitored care gaps and conducted proactive patient outreach, including referrals, mail reminders and motivational interviewing by telephone. MAIN MEASURES: Measurements included mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure, self-reported quit attempts, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) prescriptions, and referrals to disease management services. KEY RESULTS: Change in mean blood pressure, blood pressure control, and smoking quit rates were similar across study groups. Patients on intervention teams were more likely to receive NRT (OR = 1.4; 95 % CI 1.2–1.6) and enroll in the disease management services MOVE! (OR = 1.2; 95 % CI 1.1–1.6) and Telehealth (OR = 1.7, 95 % CI 1.4–2.1) than patients on control teams. CONCLUSIONS: Panel Management support for primary care teams improved process, but not outcome variables among veterans with hypertension and smoking. Incorporating PMAs into teams was feasible and highly valued by the clinical staff, but clinical impact may require a longer intervention.

Abstract

Objectives. We examined the potential for glycemic control monitoring and screening for diabetes in a dental setting among adults (n = 408) with or at risk for diabetes. Methods. In 2013 and 2014, we performed hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) tests on dried blood samples of gingival crevicular blood and compared these with paired "gold-standard" HbA1c tests with dried finger-stick blood samples in New York City dental clinic patients. We examined differences in sociodemographics and diabetes-related risk and health care characteristics for 3 groups of at-risk patients. Results. About half of the study sample had elevated HbA1c values in the combined prediabetes and diabetes ranges, with approximately one fourth of those in the diabetes range. With a correlation of 0.991 between gingival crevicular and finger-stick blood HbA1c, measures of concurrence between the tests were extremely high for both elevated HbA1c and diabetes-range HbA1c levels. Persons already diagnosed with diabetes and undiagnosed persons aged 45 years or older could especially benefit from HbA1c testing at dental visits. Conclusions. Gingival crevicular blood collected at the dental visit can be used to screen for diabetes and monitor glycemic control for many at-risk patients.

Abstract

Background: Very brief single-item screening questions (SISQs) for alcohol and other drug use can facilitate screening in health care settings, but are not widely used. Self-administered versions of the SISQs could ease barriers to their implementation. Objective: We sought to validate SISQs for self-administration in primary care patients. Design: Participants completed SISQs for alcohol and drugs (illicit and prescription misuse) on touchscreen tablet computers. Self-reported reference standard measures of unhealthy use, and more specifically of risky consumption, problem use, and substance use disorders, were then administered by an interviewer, and saliva drug tests were collected. Participants: Adult patients aged 21–65 years were consecutively enrolled from two urban safety-net primary care clinics. Main Measures: The SISQs were compared against reference standards to determine sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for alcohol and drug use. Key Results: Among the 459 participants, 22 % reported unhealthy alcohol use and 25 % reported drug use in the past year. The SISQ-alcohol had sensitivity of 73.3 % (95 % CI 65.3–80.3) and specificity of 84.7 % (95 % CI 80.2–88.5), AUC = 0.79 (95 % CI 0.75–0.83), for detecting unhealthy alcohol use, and sensitivity of 86.7 % (95 % CI 75.4–94.1) and specificity of 74.2 % (95 % CI 69.6–78.4), AUC = 0.80 (95 % CI 0.76–0.85), for alcohol use disorder. The SISQ-drug had sensitivity of 71.3 % (95 % CI 62.4–79.1) and specificity of 94.3 % (95 % CI 91.3–96.6), AUC = 0.83 (95 % CI 0.79–0.87), for detecting unhealthy drug use, and sensitivity of 85.1 (95 % CI 75.0–92.3) and specificity of 88.6 % (95 % CI 85.0–91.6), AUC = 0.87 (95 % CI 0.83–0.91), for drug use disorder. Conclusions: The self-administered SISQs are a valid approach to detecting unhealthy alcohol and other drug use in primary care patients. Although self-administered SISQs may be less accurate than the previously validated interviewer-administered versions, they are potentially easier to implement and more likely to retain their fidelity in real-world practice settings.

Abstract

Objectives: Given the existence of many potential oral health complications for adults with diabetes (especially for those who do not practise regular oral self-care), and the specific importance of regular interdental cleaning, the research determined the proportion of U.S. adults with diabetes who practise daily interdental cleaning and their socio-demographic, economic and oral health characteristics related to this practice. Methods: Analyses were conducted using data collected from 573 dentulous adults with diabetes ≥ 30 years who participated in the U.S. 2009-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination survey. Using complex sample survey software, findings were extrapolated to >15 million U.S. adults. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of interdental cleaning, and chi-square tests were used to identify salient individual characteristics related to this practice. Results: 41.2% reported that they never used any interdental device, while 24.8% indicated that they practised interdental cleaning daily. Statistically significant relationships (P < 0.05) with daily interdental cleaning included female sex, ever having had treatment for gum disease and using mouthwash daily for a dental problem. Conclusions: Because so many adults with diabetes do not practise regular interdental cleaning, and in view of the important role that dental hygienists fulfil as oral healthcare educators, there is a great need for dental hygienists to teach and motivate adults with diabetes to practise regular interdental cleaning. This need is especially great for subgroups of these adults who are men, have not been treated for periodontitis and do not regularly use a mouthwash for dental problems.

Abstract

For Latinas with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels in the prediabetes and diabetes ranges, early detection can support steps to optimize their health. Data collected in 2009-2010 indicate that 36.7% of Latinas in the United States had elevated FPG levels. Latinas with elevated FPG who were unaware of their diabetes status were significantly less likely than non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black women to have seen a health care provider in the past year (75.8%, 92.9%, and 90.2%, respectively; p = .018). With almost 1 million Latinas in the United States with elevated FPG unaware of their diabetes risk, and less likely than other at-risk women to see health care providers, there is an urgent need to establish alternate sites of opportunity for their diabetes screening. En las mujeres latinas con niveles plasmáticos de glucosa en ayunas (NPGA) correspondientes a prediabetes y diabetes, la detección temprana es un aspecto componente fundamental para la buena salud. Datos obtenidos entre los años 2009-2010 indican que un 36.7% de las mujeres Latinas en los Estados Unidos tenían NPGA elevados. Las mujeres Latinas con NPGA elevados que no sabían que tenían diabetes fueron significativamente menos que las mujeres blancas y negras no hispanas que habían visitado a un proveedor de salud en el último año (75.8%, 92% y 90.2% respectivamente; p = .018). Alrededor de un millón de Latinas en los Estados Unidos con NPGA elevados no conocen su riesgo de diabetes y tienen menos probabilidades que otras mujeres a riesgo de diabetes de visitar a un proveedor de salud. En consecuencia, es urgente establecer lugares alternos donde se puedan realizar exámenes para detectar diabetes.

Abstract

With millions of at-risk people undiagnosed with prediabetes and diabetes, there is a need to identify alternate screening sites for out-of-range glucose values. We examined practical issues and accuracy (relative to high-performance liquid chromatography testing in a laboratory) in the use of the A1cNow point-of-care device for this screening in general practice dental clinics at a large University-based dental college. Health care professionals obtained evaluable readings for only 70% of the subjects, even after 2 attempts, and its use according to manufacturer?€™s instructions was often challenging in the busy environment of the dental clinic. At thresholds for prediabetes and diabetes established by the American Diabetes Association, sensitivities of the A1cNow kit relative to the HPLC method were 91.9% and 100%, respectively. However, specificities for prediabetes and diabetes were 66.7% and 82.4%, respectively, indicating many false-positive results. A better strategy for diabetes screening may involve a laboratory-based analysis approach that is patient-friendly and provider-friendly, with minimal burden to the dental team.