Dianne Davis

Addressing Literacy and Numeracy to Improve Diabetes Care: Two Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE Diabetic patients with lower literacy or numeracy skills are at greater risk for poor diabetes outcomes. This study evaluated the impact of providing literacy- and numeracy-sensitive diabetes care within an enhanced diabetes care program on A1C and other diabetes outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In two randomized controlled trials, we enrolled 198 adult diabetic patients with most recent A1C ≥7.0%, referred for participation in an enhanced diabetes care program. For 3 months, control patients received care from existing enhanced diabetes care programs, whereas intervention patients received enhanced programs that also addressed literacy and numeracy at each institution. Intervention providers received health communication training and used the interactive Diabetes Literacy and Numeracy Education Toolkit with patients. A1C was measured at 3 and 6 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes included self-efficacy, self-management behaviors, and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS At 3 months, both intervention and control patients had significant improvements in A1C from baseline (intervention −1.50 [95% CI −1.80 to −1.02]; control −0.80 [−1.10 to −0.30]). In adjusted analysis, there was greater improvement in A1C in the intervention group than in the control group (P = 0.03). At 6 months, there were no differences in A1C between intervention and control groups. Self-efficacy improved from baseline for both groups. No significant differences were found for self-management behaviors or satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS A literacy- and numeracy-focused diabetes care program modestly improved self-efficacy and glycemic control compared with standard enhanced diabetes care, but the difference attenuated after conclusion of the intervention.

Development and validation of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT)

BackgroundLow literacy and numeracy skills are common. Adequate numeracy skills are crucial in the management of diabetes. Diabetes patients use numeracy skills to interpret glucose meters, administer medications, follow dietary guidelines and other tasks. Existing literacy scales may not be adequate to assess numeracy skills. This paper describes the development and psychometric properties of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT), the first scale to specifically measure numeracy skills used in diabetes.MethodsThe items of the DNT were developed by an expert panel and refined using cognitive response interviews with potential respondents. The final version of the DNT (43 items) and other relevant measures were administered to a convenience sample of 398 patients with diabetes. Internal reliability was determined by the Kuder-Richardson coefficient (KR-20). An a priori hypothetical model was developed to determine construct validity. A shortened 15-item version, the DNT15, was created through split sample analysis.ResultsThe DNT had excellent internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.95). The DNT was significantly correlated (p < 0.05) with education, income, literacy and math skills, and diabetes knowledge, supporting excellent construct validity. The mean score on the DNT was 61% and took an average of 33 minutes to complete. The DNT15 also had good internal reliability (KR-20 = 0.90 and 0.89). In split sample analysis, correlations of the DNT-15 with the full DNT in both sub-samples was high (rho = 0.96 and 0.97, respectively).ConclusionThe DNT is a reliable and valid measure of diabetes related numeracy skills. An equally adequate but more time-efficient version of the DNT, the DNT15, can be used for research and clinical purposes to evaluate diabetes related numeracy.

Literacy, numeracy, and portion-size estimation skills.

BACKGROUND Portion-size estimation is an important component of weight management. Literacy and numeracy skills may be important for accurate portion-size estimation. It was hypothesized that low literacy and numeracy would be associated with decreased accuracy in portion estimation. METHODS A cross-sectional study of primary care patients was performed from July 2006 to August 2007; analyses were performed from January 2008 to October 2008. Literacy and numeracy were assessed with validated measures (the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine and the Wide Range Achievement Test, third edition). For three solid-food items and one liquid item, participants were asked to serve both a single serving and a specified weight or volume amount representing a single serving. Portion-size estimation was considered accurate if it fell within +/-25% of a single standard serving. RESULTS Of 164 participants, 71% were women, 64% were white, and mean (SD) BMI was 30.6 (8.3) kg/m(2). While 91% reported completing high school, 24% had <9th-grade literacy skills and 67% had <9th-grade numeracy skills. When all items were combined, 65% of participants were accurate when asked to serve a single serving, and 62% were accurate when asked to serve a specified amount. In unadjusted analyses, both literacy and numeracy were associated with inaccurate estimation. In multivariate analyses, only lower literacy was associated with inaccuracy in serving a single serving (OR=2.54; 95% CI=1.11, 5.81). CONCLUSIONS In this study, many participants had poor portion-size estimation skills. Lower literacy skills were associated with less accuracy when participants were asked to serve a single serving. Opportunities may exist to improve portion-size estimation by addressing literacy.

Changing Behavior: Practical lessons from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial

The recently completed Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) has elicited renewed interest in behavior change strategies, because intensive therapy of 1DDM in the DCCT was a comprehensive behavioral change program with unequivocal health benefits (1,2). Intensive therapy lowered blood glucose levels and slowed the appearance and progression of microvascular and neuropathic complications because participants changed many behaviors, including testing blood glucose and administering insulin more frequently, quantifying and regulating dietary intake, and modifying diet, insulin, and physical activity to balance their effects on blood glucose levels. It is natural to ask what can be learned from the DCCT about changing behavior that is pertinent to diabetes management in clinical practice. The DCCT compared two treatment programs that differed in many ways. Among the differences between the two treatments was the more frequent use of behavioral change strategies in the intensive therapy group. Use of specific behavior change strategies depended on the needs of individual patients. In addition, while the framework of intensive therapy was dictated by the study protocol, the detailed application of behavioral change strategies is presumed to have varied with the skills and preferences of each Clinical Center staff, as was also true of other elements of treatment such as insulin management and the choice of pump or multiple injection therapy. Consequently, there were uncontrolled differences across clinics and individuals in the use of behavioral interventions. Therefore, the DCCT Study Group has not attempted to draw systematic conclusions about the effectiveness of specific behavioral change strategies or other elements of the intensive therapy program. Nevertheless, it is possible to offer opinions on the behavioral strategies that seemed most helpful. To generate a broad synthesis of practical lessons from the DCCT, the first author recruited collaborators from several DCCT Clinics and disciplines, including nursing, nutrition, clinical psychology, psychiatry, and social work. The practical lessons we offer here were not discovered or used for the first time in the DCCT, but are well grounded in a large body of literature, examples of which we cite. A short list of additional reading is also included. The point emphasized here is that the DCCT has demonstrated that these strategies are truly effective in achieving longterm behavioral changes and health benefits in subjects with IDDM. Before discussing specific behavioral change strategies, we wish to articulate a general principle suggested by the DCCT: ordinary people can adopt and maintain substantial behavioral changes. Because of the extraordinary adherence of the DCCT volunteers to the protocol, it has been implied that they were so well

The Diabetes Literacy and Numeracy Education Toolkit (DLNET) Materials to Facilitate Diabetes Education and Management in Patients With Low Literacy and Numeracy Skills

Purpose Diabetes self-management education is an important component of comprehensive diabetes care. Patients with low health literacy and numeracy may have difficulty translating information from traditional diabetes educational programs and materials into effective self-care. Methods To address this potential barrier to successful diabetes teaching and counseling, the authors developed the Diabetes Literacy and Numeracy Education Toolkit (DLNET). Conclusion The DLNET is composed of 24 interactive modules covering standard diabetes care topics that can be customized to individual patient needs and used by all members of the multidisciplinary diabetes care team. The materials content and formatting aims to improve the ease of use for diabetes patients with low literacy and numeracy by adhering to a lower text reading level, using illustrations for key concepts, and color-coding and other accommodations to guide patients through instructions for self-care. Individual sections of the DLNET may be provided to patients for initial teaching, as well as for reinforcement. Although designed for lower literacy and numeracy skills, the DLNET provides unique materials to facilitate diabetes education for all patients.

Utility of a Brief Self-Efficacy Scale in Clinical Training Program Evaluation

Self-efficacy is often studied as a predictor of professional practice behaviors or as an outcome of clinical training, using brief scales with little validation. This study examines the utility of a brief self-efficacy scale in the evaluation of a clinical training program. Subjects were 119 registered dietitians who participated in diabetes training. Hypothesized relationships between self-efficacy ratings and indices of skill mastery, participation in training, and subsequent practice change were examined. Self-efficacy ratings after training correlated significantly with relevant prior experience (r = .4 and .29, p < .01) but not total experience and with knowledge post-test score (r = .21, p < .02). Self-efficacy for all 12 program objectives increased significantly after training. Post-training self-efficacy for two program objectives correlated significantly with self-reported successful practice changes related to those objectives (r = .4, p < .04 and r = .51, p < .01). The data suggest that brief self-efficacy assessments can contribute meaningfully to clinical training program evaluation.

Evaluation of a Multicomponent, Behaviorally Oriented, Problem-Based “Summer School” Program for Adolescents with Diabetes

A 2-week summer school program, combining problem-based learning with behavior therapy, was developed to help adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes improve their ability to cope with obstacles to dietary management. Ten students participated in a first session, and 9 participated in a second session, serving as a waiting list control group. Outcomes were evaluated preand postsession and at a 4-month follow-up using 3-day food diaries, blood glucose data, and paper-and-pencil tests of diabetes-related knowledge, self-efficacy, coping strategies, and general problem solving. Improvements were observed in self-efficacy, problem-solving skills, and self-reported coping strategies. No significant changes were observed in daily intake of fat, cholesterol, calories, mean blood glucose levels or blood glucose variability, and diabetes knowledge. Comparisons between the first group and the waiting list control group do not allow the significant pre-post changes to be clearly attributed to the summer school program.

Use of Carbohydrate Counting for Meal Planning in Type I Diabetes

Certain questions often arise regarding carbohydrate counting, such as: Why use carbohydrate counting ? Where does one start? How much carbolrydrate is prescribed? How does one balance the diet? How is carbohydrate counting taught to patients? Which patients are the best candidates for carbohydrate counting? This article provides possible answers to these questions based on clinical experience at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Diabetes Research and Training Center, and the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial.

The PRIDE (Partnership to Improve Diabetes Education) Toolkit: Development and Evaluation of Novel Literacy and Culturally Sensitive Diabetes Education Materials

Purpose Patients with low literacy, low numeracy, and/or linguistic needs can experience challenges understanding diabetes information and applying concepts to their self-management. The authors designed a toolkit of education materials that are sensitive to patients’ literacy and numeracy levels, language preferences, and cultural norms and that encourage shared goal setting to improve diabetes self-management and health outcomes. The Partnership to Improve Diabetes Education (PRIDE) toolkit was developed to facilitate diabetes self-management education and support. Methods The PRIDE toolkit includes a comprehensive set of 30 interactive education modules in English and Spanish to support diabetes self-management activities. The toolkit builds upon the authors’ previously validated Diabetes Literacy and Numeracy Education Toolkit (DLNET) by adding a focus on shared goal setting, addressing the needs of Spanish-speaking patients, and including a broader range of diabetes management topics. Each PRIDE module was evaluated using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) instrument to determine the material’s cultural appropriateness and its sensitivity to the needs of patients with low literacy and low numeracy. Reading grade level was also assessed using the Automated Readability Index (ARI), Coleman-Liau, Flesch-Kincaid, Fry, and SMOG formulas. Conclusions The average reading grade level of the materials was 5.3 (SD 1.0), with a mean SAM of 91.2 (SD 5.4). All of the 30 modules received a “superior” score (SAM >70%) when evaluated by 2 independent raters. The PRIDE toolkit modules can be used by all members of a multidisciplinary team to assist patients with low literacy and low numeracy in managing their diabetes.

The diabetes nutrition education study randomized controlled trial: A comparative effectiveness study of approaches to nutrition in diabetes self-management education

OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness of different approaches to nutrition education in diabetes self-management education and support (DSME/S). METHODS We randomized 150 adults with type 2 diabetes to either certified diabetes educator (CDE)-delivered DSME/S with carbohydrate gram counting or the modified plate method versus general health education. The primary outcome was change in HbA1C over 6 months. RESULTS At 6 months, HbA1C improved within the plate method [-0.83% (-1.29, -0.33), P<0.001] and carbohydrate counting [-0.63% (-1.03, -0.18), P=0.04] groups but not the control group [P=0.34]. Change in HbA1C from baseline between the control and intervention groups was not significant at 6 months (carbohydrate counting, P=0.36; modified plate method, P=0.08). In a pre-specified subgroup analysis of patients with a baseline HbA1C 7-10%, change in HbA1C from baseline improved in the carbohydrate counting [-0.86% (-1.47, -0.26), P=0.006] and plate method groups [-0.76% (-1.33, -0.19), P=0.01] compared to controls. CONCLUSION CDE-delivered DSME/S focused on carbohydrate counting or the modified plate method improved glycemic control in patients with an initial HbA1C between 7 and 10%. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Both carbohydrate counting and the modified plate method improve glycemic control as part of DSME/S.