Nuñez Daisy, Marino-Nuñez Diana, Staab Erin M, Dinh Tracy, Zhu Mengqi, Wan Wen, Schaefer Cynthia T, Campbell Amanda, Quinn Michael T, Baig Arshiya A
Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Front Health Serv. 2022 Nov 11;2:961073. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.961073. eCollection 2022.
Diabetes group visits (GVs) have been shown to improve glycemic control, enrich patient self-care, and decrease healthcare utilization among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). While telehealth has become routine, virtual GVs remain understudied, especially in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). We conducted a 5-year cluster randomized trial with a waitlist control group to test the impact of diabetes GVs on patients' outcomes in Midwestern FQHCs. Due to COVID-19, the 6 waitlisted FQHCs adapted to virtual GVs. FQHC staff were provided training and support to implement virtual GVs. The GV intervention included 6 monthly 1-1.5-h long education sessions and appointments with a primary care provider. We measured staff perspectives and satisfaction GV session logs, monthly webinars, and staff surveys and interviews. Adaptations for implementation of virtual GV included: additional staff training, video conferencing platform use, decreased session length and group size, and adjusting study materials, activities, and provider appointments. Sites enrolled a total of 48 adults with T2DM for virtual GVs. Most FQHCs were urban and all FQHCs predominantly had patients on public insurance. Patients attended 2.1 ± 2.2 GVs across sites on average. Thirty-four patients (71%) attended one or more virtual GVs. The average GV lasted 79.4 min. Barriers to virtual GVs included patient technology issues and access, patient recruitment and enrollment, and limited staff availability. Virtual GV facilitators included providing tablets, internet access from the clinic, and technical support. Staff reported spending on average 4.9 h/week planning and implementing GVs (SD = 5.9). On average, 6 staff from each FQHC participated in GV training and 1.2 staff reported past GV experience. All staff had worked at least 1 year at their FQHC and most reported multiple years of experience caring for patients with T2DM. Staff-perceived virtual GV benefits included: empowered patients to manage their diabetes, provided patients with social support and frequent contact with providers, improved relationships with patients, increased team collaboration, and better patient engagement and care-coordination. Future studies and health centers can incorporate these findings to implement virtual diabetes GVs and promote accessible diabetes care.
糖尿病小组问诊(GVs)已被证明可改善血糖控制、丰富患者自我护理,并降低2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者的医疗资源利用率。虽然远程医疗已成为常规手段,但虚拟小组问诊仍研究不足,尤其是在联邦合格医疗中心(FQHCs)。我们进行了一项为期5年的整群随机试验,设有一个等待名单对照组,以测试糖尿病小组问诊对中西部FQHCs患者结局的影响。由于新冠疫情,6个列入等待名单的FQHCs转而采用虚拟小组问诊。FQHC的工作人员接受了实施虚拟小组问诊的培训并获得了支持。小组问诊干预包括6次每月时长1至1.5小时的教育课程以及与初级保健提供者的预约。我们通过小组问诊会话记录、月度网络研讨会以及工作人员调查和访谈来衡量工作人员的观点和满意度。实施虚拟小组问诊的调整措施包括:额外的工作人员培训、视频会议平台的使用、缩短课程时长和小组规模,以及调整学习材料、活动和提供者预约。各站点共招募了48名患有T2DM的成年人参加虚拟小组问诊。大多数FQHCs位于城市,所有FQHCs的患者主要都有公共保险。各站点的患者平均参加了2.1±2.2次小组问诊。34名患者(71%)参加了一次或多次虚拟小组问诊。小组问诊平均时长为79.4分钟。虚拟小组问诊的障碍包括患者的技术问题和接入问题、患者招募和登记,以及工作人员可利用时间有限。虚拟小组问诊的促进因素包括提供平板电脑、诊所的网络接入以及技术支持。工作人员报告称,平均每周花费4.9小时来规划和实施小组问诊(标准差=5.9)。每个FQHC平均有6名工作人员参加小组问诊培训,1.2名工作人员报告有过小组问诊经验。所有工作人员在其FQHC工作至少1年,大多数人报告有多年护理T2DM患者的经验。工作人员认为虚拟小组问诊的益处包括:使患者有能力管理自己的糖尿病、为患者提供社会支持并使其与提供者保持频繁联系、改善与患者的关系、增强团队协作,以及提高患者参与度和护理协调。未来的研究和医疗中心可以纳入这些研究结果来实施虚拟糖尿病小组问诊并推广可及的糖尿病护理。