The Diabetes Prevention Program is a 16-session education program conducted by lifestyle coaches. Virtual Diabetes Prevention Program.
Half of all Americans age 65 or older have prediabetes and are at risk for developing type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Prevention and Management. Increased control of diabetes for those who have been diagnosed. Diabetes Prevention and Management.
Healthy lifestyle and prevention programs can help you take control of your life and manage your health conditions. Diabetes Education Empowerment Program. Inhabit Ohio Diabetes Prevention And Control Program Ohio Diabetes Prevention And Control Program ohio diabetes prevention and control program Guise Conversation ohio diabetes prevention and control. Diabetes prevention: 5 tips for taking control. Diabetes prevention program (DPP). National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse. Ohio Diabetes Prevention and Control Program Bureau of Health Promotion and Risk Reduction Office of Healthy Ohio Ohio Department of Health September 2008.
A Randomized Controlled Trial Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program to a University Worksite, Ohio, 2. Weinhold, MS, RD; Carla K. Miller, Ph. D, RD; David G. Marrero, Ph. D; Haikady N. Nagaraja, Ph. D; Brian C. Gascon, Ph. DSuggested citation for this article: Weinhold KR, Miller CK, Marrero DG, Nagaraja HN, Focht BC, Gascon GM. A Randomized Controlled Trial Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program to a University Worksite, Ohio, 2.
Prev Chronic Dis 2. DOI: http: //dx. doi. MEDSCAPE CMEMedscape, LLC is pleased to provide online continuing medical education (CME) for this journal article, allowing clinicians the opportunity to earn CME credit.
This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and Policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education through the joint providership of Medscape, LLC and Preventing Chronic Disease. Medscape, LLC is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Medscape, LLC designates this Journal- based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s). Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. All other clinicians completing this activity will be issued a certificate of participation.
To participate in this journal CME activity: (1) review the learning objectives and author disclosures; (2) study the education content; (3) take the post- test with a 7. Release date: November 2. Expiration date: November 2. Learning Objectives. Upon completion of this activity, participants will be able to: Describe the worksite lifestyle intervention used in this randomized trial among employees with prediabetes. Discuss the efficacy of a worksite lifestyle intervention for improving metabolic risk factors among employees with prediabetes, based on a randomized trial. Discuss the efficacy of a worksite lifestyle intervention for improving behavioral risk factors among employees with prediabetes.
EDITORSEllen Taratus. Editor, Preventing Chronic Disease. Disclosure: Ellen Taratus has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. CME AUTHORLaurie Barclay, MDFreelance writer and reviewer, Medscape, LLCDisclosure: Laurie Barclay, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. AUTHORSKellie R. Weinhold, MS, RD, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Disclosure: Kellie R.
Weinhold, MS, RD, has disclosed no relevant financil relationships. Carla K. Miller, Ph.
D, RD, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Disclosure: Carla K. Miller, Ph. D, RD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
David G. Marrero, Ph. D, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. Disclosure: David G.
Marrero, Ph. D, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Haikady N. Nagaraja, Ph. D, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Disclosure: Haikady N. Nagaraja, Ph. D, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Served as an advisor or consultant for: Abbott Nutrition.
Brian C. Focht, Ph. D, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Disclosure: Brian C. Focht, Ph. D, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
Gregg M. Gascon, Ph. D, The Ohio State University Health Plan, Inc., Columbus, Ohio. Disclosure: Gregg M.
Gascon, Ph. D, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. PEER REVIEWEDAbstract.
Introduction. Working adults spend much time at the workplace, an ideal setting for wellness programs targeting weight loss and disease prevention. Few randomized trials have evaluated the efficacy of worksite diabetes prevention programs.
This study evaluated the efficacy of a worksite lifestyle intervention on metabolic and behavioral risk factors compared with usual care. Methods. A pretest–posttest control group design with 3- month follow- up was used. Participants with prediabetes were recruited from a university worksite and randomized to receive a 1. Participants were evaluated at baseline, postintervention, and 3- month follow- up.
Dietary intake was measured by a food frequency questionnaire and level of physical activity by accelerometers. Repeated measures analysis of variance compared the change in outcomes between and within groups. Results. Mean (standard error . Mean (SE) reductions in fasting glucose were greater in the intervention (. In the intervention group, the intake of total energy and the percentage of energy from all fats, saturated fats, and trans fats decreased, and the intake of dietary fiber increased (all P < . Conclusion. The worksite intervention improved metabolic and behavioral risk factors among employees with prediabetes.
The long- term impact on diabetes prevention and program sustainability warrant further investigation. Top. Introduction. The prevalence of prediabetes among US adults increased significantly from 3. People with prediabetes are at increased risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus (hereinafter referred to as type 2 diabetes) as well as microvascular and macrovascular comorbidities commonly associated with type 2 diabetes (2). Rising rates of prediabetes create an urgent need to prevent or delay the development of type 2 diabetes. Intensive lifestyle interventions can prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in at- risk populations (3–5). These interventions target weight loss by improving dietary patterns and increasing physical activity (PA).
The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), for example, demonstrated that weight loss through lifestyle modification was more effective than pharmacotherapy in reducing the incidence of type 2 diabetes among adults with prediabetes, and the relative reduction in incidence remained at 1. The current need is to translate effective interventions into practice settings.
Adults spend a large portion of their time at work, making the workplace a potentially effective setting for health promotion and disease prevention. Wellness programs can generate savings in medical costs and reduce absenteeism rates. Although worksite programs can promote weight loss (7), limited evidence exists on worksite diabetes prevention programs for employees at high risk of diabetes. The workplace could be an opportune setting for identifying employees with prediabetes, reducing risk through effective programs, and if employees avert type 2 diabetes, also reducing future costs (8). The DPP has been adapted for community settings such as churches, hospitals, and YMCAs (9). Although the community- based programs promoted weight loss, thereby reducing risk for type 2 diabetes (3,6), few translational studies have evaluated the efficacy of worksite diabetes prevention programs (1. Among worksite studies that implemented the DPP, only 2 studies used a randomized design with a comparison condition (1.
PA. Moreover, one worksite study implemented a primarily self- directed, low- intensity version of the DPP (1. The objective of our trial was to evaluate the efficacy of a worksite lifestyle intervention among employees with prediabetes. It was hypothesized that the intervention would facilitate greater reductions in the percentage of weight loss than would usual care. Top. Methods. Design. A randomized pretest. Approval for the study was obtained from the university. Eligible participants were randomized at baseline to either a 1.
Figure). Beginning in October 2. Participants were randomized in blocks of 4 stratified by race and sex; 2 participants each were randomly assigned to the intervention or control arm. Assignment was generated by the statistician, and allocations were concealed in sequentially numbered opaque envelopes. The statistician was blinded to treatment assignment; however, neither participants nor lifestyle coaches were blinded to treatment allocation. All study appointments took place on the university campus.
Postintervention data were collected after the 1. Follow- up of participants was completed in May 2. Figure. Phases of the randomized controlled trial for the intervention and usual care (control) groups in a university worksite diabetes prevention stud. Ohio, 2. 01. 2. Additional study recruitment methods included campus flyers, electronic advertisements in digital newsletters, employee email notifications, and notices in Research. Match. com, a website for study recruitment. Eligibility criteria included being an employee aged 1.
BMI) of 2. 5. 0 to 5. The 7- item American Diabetes Association risk assessment questionnaire was administered to determine risk for type 2 diabetes, and those with a score of 5 or more were classified as potentially eligible and screened for any exclusionary criteria (1. Eligible participants had fasting finger- stick glucose levels of 1. L, indicative of prediabetes (1. Individuals with fasting glucose levels of 9.
L or 1. 26 to 1. 40 mg/d. L completed a second finger stick to assess hemoglobin A1c (Hb. A1c); Hb. A1c levels of 5.
Individuals with Hb. A1c or glucose levels above the indicated ranges were advised to see their physician and excluded from participation.
Potentially eligible participants completed the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire; those who answered positively to 1 or more questions were excluded (1. Employees older than 6. Individuals were excluded if they had a current diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, were pursuing or recently had weight- loss surgery, were taking medications that modify blood glucose levels, such as metformin or corticosteroids, or were actively participating in a weight- management program. Participants could not be pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to become pregnant, or planning to leave university employment or move from the area within one year of study enrollment. Lifestyle intervention. Participants randomized to the intervention group received the manualized 1.
DPP Outcomes Study Lifestyle Balance Program (1. The behavioral goals for the program were consistent with those of the DPP: achieve at least 7% weight loss, engage in at least 1. PA, and consume 2.