Document text
Principal Investigator: Anna Michael Gorczyca
Organization: UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER
Fiscal Year: 2024
Award: $637,649
Funding agency: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
PROJECT SUMMARY
Diabetes disproportionately impacts the 60 million individuals living in rural areas where the prevalence of Type
2 diabetes (T2D) is ~17% higher than in urban areas. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC)
National Diabetes Prevention Program (NDPP) which includes a minimum of 16 weekly core sessions over 6
mos. and 6 monthly maintenance sessions provides the framework for the prevention of T2D in the U.S.
NDPP recognized programs are available in ~28% of U.S. counties; however, access to at least 1 NDPP
recognized program is significantly lower in rural (2.6%) compared with urban areas (11.1%). The Cooperative
State Research, Education and Extension Service, a partnership between the U.S Department of Agriculture,
land-grant universities and county governments represents a potentially effective but underutilized site for
delivery of NDPP to rural residents. However, evidence to support the effectiveness of the NDPP lifestyle
intervention in rural adults with prediabetes defined by CDC criteria, with the intervention delivered by
Cooperative Extension staff who have completed CDC approved training and using CDC recommendations for
both program curriculum and meeting schedule is unavailable. Distance learning, e.g., group video using
Zoom®, for delivery of NDPP is currently approved for CDC recognition. Remote delivery platforms provide a
potentially cost-effective strategy for improving participation and retention, which are both important predictors
of weight loss and reduced diabetes incidence in NDPP. The proposed 12-mo. Type II hybrid effectiveness-
implementation trial will compare the effectiveness of the NDPP protocol delivered via distance learning by
agents associated with Kansas State Research and Extension (KSRE) serving as a lifestyle coach (GV-NDPP)
vs. a self-directed control arm (SD-NDPP) which will receive the NDPP curriculum on the same schedule used
for the GV-NDPP arm delivered to individual participants via an iPad® with available lifestyle coach support.
Ten KSRE local units/districts serving rural Kansas counties will be allocated to either active (n=5) or passive
recruitment (n=5). Active recruitment will form collaborations with rural health clinics to identify potential
participants using clinic electronic health records. Passive recruitment will use traditional recruitment
techniques, e.g., flyers, email list serves, media advertising etc. Each of the 10 sites will recruit 16 adults with
prediabetes defined using current NDPP criteria living in the county served by KSRE (n=160) who will be
randomized (1:1) to one of the 2 intervention arms. Aim 1 will compare weight change between the GV-NDPP
and SD-NDPP arms across 12 mos. Secondarily, we will compare the proportion of participants meeting CDC
weight loss (≥5%) and physical activity goals (≥150 min./wk.), and changes in hemoglobin A1c across 12 mos.
between intervention arms. Aim 2 will compare the effectiveness of passive and active recruitment. Aim 3 will
compare the cost and cost effectiveness of delivery (GV-NDPP vs. SD-NDPP) and recruitment (passive vs.
active) methods.
Terms: <21+ years old><Address><Adult><Adult Human><Adult-Onset Diabetes Mellitus><Advertising><Age><Agriculture><Body Weight><Body Weight Changes><Body Weight decreased><Centers for Disease Control><Centers for Disease Control and Prevention><Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.)><Clinic><Collaborations><Control Groups><County><County Government><Curriculum><Development><Diabetes Mellitus><Distance Learning><E-Mail><Economic Income><Economical Income><Education><Educational Curriculum><Educational aspects><Effectiveness><Effectiveness of Interventions><Electronic Health Record><Electronic Mail><Eligibility><Eligibility Determination><Email><Enrollment><Ethnic Origin><Ethnicity><Fats><Fatty acid glycerol esters><Food><Frequencies><Funding><Glycohemoglobin A><Glycosylated hemoglobin A><Goals><Grant><Hb A1><Hb A1a+b><Hb A1c><HbA1><HbA1c><Hemoglobin A><Hemoglobin A(1)><Improve Access><Incidence><Income><Individual><Individuals from minority><Individuals of minority><Intake><Intervention><Intervention Strategies><Interview><Kansas><Ketosis-Resistant Diabetes Mellitus><Life Style><Lifestyle><Maintenance><Maturity-Onset Diabetes Mellitus><Mediator><Methods><Minority Groups><Minority People><Minority Population><Minority individual><Monitor><NIDDM><Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes><Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus><Noninsulin Dependent Diabetes><Noninsulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus><PRISM framework><PRISM model><Participant><Patient Recruitments><Physical activity><Population><Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model><Pragmatic, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model><Prediabetes><Prediabetes syndrome><Prediabetic State><Prevalence><Prevention><Prevention program><Program Sustainabilities><Program Sustainability><Protocol><Protocol Screening><Protocols documentation><Race><Races><Randomized><Recommendation><Recruitment Activity><Research><Rural><Rural Community><Schedule><Self Direction><Services><Site><Slow-Onset Diabetes Mellitus><Stable Diabetes Mellitus><Structure><T2 DM><T2D><T2DM><Techniques><Time><Training><Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus><Type 2 diabetes><Type II Diabetes Mellitus><Type II diabetes><United States Centers for Disease Control><United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention><Universities><Weight Change><Weight Gain><Weight Increase><Weight Loss><Weight Reduction><active recruitment><adult onset diabetes><adulthood><ages><arm><assess effectiveness><body weight gain><body weight increase><body weight loss><compare cost><compare effectiveness><compare intervention><comparison intervention><cost><cost comparison><cost effective><cost effectiveness><delivered remotely><demographics><determine effectiveness><developmental><diabetes><diabetes prevention program><effectiveness and implementation trial><effectiveness assessment><effectiveness evaluation><effectiveness/implementation hybrid trial><effectiveness/implementation trial><electronic communication><electronic health care record><electronic health medical record><electronic health plan record><electronic health registry><electronic medical health record><enroll><evaluate effectiveness><evidence base><examine effectiveness><hemoglobin A1c><high risk><improved><incomes><information gathering><intervention arm><intervention cost><intervention delivery><intervention participants><interventional strategy><ketosis resistant diabetes><lesson plans><life style intervention><lifestyle intervention><male><maturity onset diabetes><meeting><meetings><participant recruitment><pre-diabetes><pre-diabetic><prediabetic><prevent><preventing><primary outcome><program sustainment><programs><racial><racial background><racial origin><randomisation><randomization><randomly assigned><recruit><remote delivery><remote learning><rural area><rural clinic><rural counties><rural dwellers><rural health clinic><rural location><rural region><rural resident><secondary outcome><sex><treatment arm><type 2 DM><type II DM><type two diabetes><under served rural area><underserved rural area><urban area><urban location><urban region><weight loss program><weight loss programming><wt gain><wt-loss>