| Literature DB >> 35074000 |
Megha K Shah1, Sukyi Naing2, Nithin Kurra3, Mary Beth Weber2, Nadia Islam4, Mohammed K Ali5,2, K M Venkat Narayan2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interventions focused on weight loss can prevent, delay, and improve management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, implementation of these programs is challenging in diverse populations. South Asians have higher risk for T2D, yet to date, there have been limited programs for this community in the USA. The aim of this project was to develop and test the feasibility of a tailored group visit model for Bangladeshis with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or prediabetes based in primary care.Entities:
Keywords: Asian Americans; Community-based participatory research; Diabetes mellitus, Type 2; Health programs; Pre-diabetic state; Shared medical appointment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35074000 PMCID: PMC8785445 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-022-00974-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud ISSN: 2055-5784
Demographic characteristics of focus group participants by gender
| Characteristic | Women | Men |
|---|---|---|
| 18–40 | 7 (30%) | 8 (30%) |
| 41–60 | 10 (44%) | 15 (56%) |
| 61–70 | 2 (9%) | 3 (11%) |
| Missing | 4 (17%) | 1 (3%) |
| Mean age | 42.1 years | 47.8 years |
| Single | 2 (9%) | 3 (11%) |
| Married | 18 (78%) | 24 (89%) |
| Missing | 3 (13%) | 0 |
| High school degree | 3 (13%) | 1 (4%) |
| Some college | 7 (30%) | 2 (14.5%) |
| Bachelor’s degree | 8 (35%) | 12 (44%) |
| Master’s degree | 3 (13%) | 10 (37%) |
| Doctorate-level | 2 (9%) | 2 (14.5%) |
Fig. 1Modified CONSORT flow diagram for DoST Intervention
Demographic characteristics of the DoST pilot intervention study participants at baseline
| Characteristics | Mean (SD) or % | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Gender (in % of total) | ||
| Males | 43% | – |
| Females | 57% | |
| Age | 50 | 23-74 |
| Maximum education level (in %) | ||
| Elementary school | 8% | |
| Junior high school/some high school | 0% | |
| High school or GED | 23% | |
| Technical/vocational school/associates degree | 0% | |
| Some college or university | 8% | – |
| College or university graduate | 46% | |
| Graduate level/advanced degree | 8% | |
| No formal education/never attended school | 8% | |
| HbA1C level in blood (in %) | 6.3 (1.0) | 5.1–8.9 |
| Weight (kg) | 75.3 (12.6) | 57.45–99.18 |
| Systolic blood pressure (in mmHg) | 135 (23.7) | 110–190 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (in mmHg) | 80.2 (8.4) | 60–92 |
| Body mass index (in kg/m2) | 29.8 (4.9) | 23.4–40.7 |
| % reported previous history of: | ||
| High blood pressure | 54% | |
| High blood cholesterol | 62% | |
| High blood sugar | 77% | - |
| Dental problems | 46% | |
| Breast cancer | 0% | |
| Colon cancer | 0% | |
Key: HbA1c =hemoglobin A1c, GED = graduation equivalency diploma, SD standard deviation
Data collected in 2019 from an urban, academic, and family medicine clinic
Cardiometabolic risk factors from baseline to end of study
| Variable | Baseline for participants with follow-up data | End of study | Change for participants with follow-up dataa | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
| HbA1c (%) | 6.1(0.6) | 6.1(0.6) | − 0.04 (0.62) | − 0.5, 0.5 |
| Weight (kg) | 77.1 (13.6) | 75.7 (13.0) | − 1.44 (2.29) | − 3.1, 0.2 |
| % change | − 2.0% | |||
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 134 (19.6) | 121 (9.0) | − 13 (14.6) | − 23.2, − 2.2 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 82 (6.3) | 78 (7.5) | − 4 (5.0) | − 7.6, − 0.1 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 169 (43.6) | 162.3 (33.3) | − 6.7 (25.1) | − 24.7, 11.3 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | 45.3 (22.5) | 45.8 (21.7) | 1.0 (6.7) | − 4.1, 5.1 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dl) | 204.5 (84.8) | 141.9 (62.8) | − 62.6 (84.7) | − 123.2, − 2.0 |
n (%) or mean (standard deviation)
HbA1C = hemoglobin A1C, HDL = high-density lipoprotein
Data collected in 2019 from an urban, academic, and family medicine clinic
aRepresents mean of absolute change for participants with baseline and follow-up data