Cargando…
Effectiveness of a Community Health Worker-Led Diabetes Intervention among Older and Younger Latino Participants: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial
Diabetes management for older Latino adults is complex, given a higher incidence of multiple coexisting medical conditions and psychosocial barriers to self-management. Community health workers (CHWs) may be effective in reducing these barriers. The REACH Detroit CHW randomized controlled interventi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6192048/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30345345 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics3030047 |
Sumario: | Diabetes management for older Latino adults is complex, given a higher incidence of multiple coexisting medical conditions and psychosocial barriers to self-management. Community health workers (CHWs) may be effective in reducing these barriers. The REACH Detroit CHW randomized controlled intervention studies with Latino/as with diabetes found improvements in self-management behaviors and glucose control after participating in a CHW-led intervention. Using data from the REACH Detroit Partnership′s cohort 3, this study used descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression analyses to evaluate whether the six-month CHW intervention had a greater effect on older Latino/as (ages 55 and older) than younger participants between baseline and post-intervention follow-up at six months. There were significant intervention effects by age group that varied by outcome. Compared to a control group that received enhanced usual care, there were statistically significant intervention effects demonstrating greater self-efficacy scores 1.27 (0.23, 2.32); p < 0.05, and reductions in HbA1c 1.02 (−1.96, −0.07); p < 0.05, among older participants in the CHW intervention, and increases in diabetes support 0.74 (0.34, 1.13); p < 0.001; and understanding of diabetes management 0.39 (0.08, 0.70); p < 0.01 among younger participants. |
---|