RESUMEN
Importance: Treatment challenges exist for younger adults with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Health care coverage, access to, and use of diabetes care are not well delineated in these high-risk populations. Objective: To compare patterns of health care coverage, access to, and use of diabetes care and determine their associations with glycemia among younger adults with T1D and with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from a survey that was jointly developed by 2 large, national cohort studies: the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth (SEARCH) study, an observational study of individuals with youth-onset T1D or T2D, and the Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY) study, a randomized clinical trial (2004-2011) followed by an observational study (2012-2020). The interviewer-directed survey was administered during in-person study visits in both studies between 2017 and 2019. Data analyses were performed between May 2021 and October 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions addressed health care coverage, usual sources of diabetes care, and frequency of care use. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels were assayed in a central laboratory. Patterns of health care factors and HbA1c levels were compared by diabetes type. Results: The analysis included 1371 participants (mean [range] age, 25 [18-36] years; 824 females [60.1%]), of whom 661 had T1D and 250 had T2D from the SEARCH study and 460 had T2D from the TODAY study. Participants had a mean (SD) diabetes duration of 11.8 (2.8) years. More participants with T1D than T2D in both the SEARCH and TODAY studies reported health care coverage (94.7%, 81.6%, and 86.7%), access to diabetes care (94.7%, 78.1%, and 73.4%), and use of diabetes care (88.1%, 80.5%, and 73.6%). Not having health care coverage was associated with significantly higher mean (SE) HbA1c levels in participants with T1D in the SEARCH study (no coverage, 10.8% [0.5%]; public, 9.4% [0.2%]; private, 8.7% [0.1%]; P < .001) and participants with T2D from the TODAY study (no coverage, 9.9% [0.3%]; public, 8.7% [0.2%]; private, 8.7% [0.2%]; P = .004). Medicaid expansion vs without expansion was associated with more health care coverage (participants with T1D: 95.8% vs 90.2%; participants with T2D in SEARCH: 86.1% vs 73.9%; participants with T2D in TODAY: 93.6% vs 74.2%) and lower HbA1c levels (participants with T1D: 9.2% vs 9.7%; participants with T2D in SEARCH: 8.4% vs 9.3%; participants with T2D in TODAY: 8.7% vs 9.3%). The T1D group incurred higher median (IQR) monthly out-of-pocket expenses than the T2D group ($74.50 [$10.00-$309.00] vs $10.00 [$0-$74.50]). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggested that lack of health care coverage and of an established source of diabetes care were associated with significantly higher HbA1c levels for participants with T1D, but inconsistent results were found for participants with T2D. Increased access to diabetes care (eg, through Medicaid expansion) may be associated with improved health outcomes, but additional strategies are needed, particularly for individuals with T2D.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1 , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Femenino , Adolescente , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/terapia , Hemoglobina Glucada , Estudios de Cohortes , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
AIMS: To assess associations of psychosocial factors with medication adherence in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes in the Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY2) cohort. METHODS: Participants (mean age 26 years) completed validated psychosocial measures. Adherence to oral hypoglycemia agents (OHAs) was assessed with 3-monthly unannounced phone pill counts; insulin adherence by self-report. Logistic and linear regressions identified factors associated with "low-adherence" (<80% of pills/insulin) controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Of 212 participants taking OHAs (67% female, 39% Hispanic, 36% non-Hispanic Black), 69.8% were low-adherent. After adjustment, beliefs that medicines are necessary was associated with lower odds of low-adherence (p = 0.040, dichotomous). Less self-management support (p = 0.008), no healthcare coverage (p = 0.001), ≥1 (p = 0.008)/≥2 (p = 0.045) need insecurities were associated with higher odds of low-adherence. Factors associated with lower % adherence (continuous) were beliefs that medicines are harmful (p < 0.001)/overused (p = 0.007)/less necessary (p = 0.022), low self-management support (p = 0.003), food insecurity (p = 0.036), no healthcare coverage (p < 0.001), ≥1 (p = 0.003)/≥2 (p = 0.018) need insecurities. Of 192 taking insulin (69% female, 36% Hispanic, 41% non-Hispanic Black, 16% non-Hispanic white), 37.0% were low-adherent. Beliefs that medicines are overused (p = 0.009), that diabetes is not serious (p = 0.010), low diabetes self-efficacy (p = 0.035), high distress (p = 0.027), low self-management support (p = 0.001), food insecurity (p = 0.020), ≥1 (p = 0.011)/≥2 (p = 0.015) insecurities increased odds of insulin low-adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Poor medication adherence, common in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes, is associated with interfering beliefs, diabetes distress and social factors. We must address these factors to develop tailored interventions for this vulnerable group.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Adulto Joven , Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto , Masculino , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Insulina/uso terapéutico , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/psicologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of high diabetes distress and associated factors in the Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY2) study cohort of young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants completed the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) at end-of-study visits. Factors examined for association with high distress were demographic (sex, race/ethnicity, age, education, income), medical (HbA1c, BMI, complications), psychological (depressive and anxiety symptoms), and social (number in household, offspring, health care coverage, established with diabetes care provider). Univariate logistic regression identified factors associated with high distress that were controlled for in multivariate logistic regressions. RESULTS: Of 438 participants, 66% were female (mean age 26.8 years, 18% non-Hispanic White, 37% non-Hispanic Black, 38% Hispanic). High distress (DDS ≥2) was reported by 105 (24%) participants. Subscales identified 40% with high regimen distress and 29.7% with high emotional burden. A greater percentage of those with high distress were female (P = 0.002), diagnosed with hypertension (P = 0.037) and retinopathy (P = 0.005), treated with insulin, had higher HbA1c, and had moderate to severe depressive and anxiety symptoms (all P < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, female sex (P < 0.001), HbA1c (P < 0.001), anxiety symptoms (P = 0.036), and lack of health care coverage (P = 0.019) were associated with high distress, after controlling for potential confounders. Moderate to severe depressive symptoms were associated with high regimen distress (P = 0.018) and emotional burden (P < 0.001); insulin treatment was associated with high emotional burden (P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Future research should identify modifiable factors associated with high diabetes distress in young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes that may inform distress interventions with this medically vulnerable group.