Diabetes Mellitus Management Among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- 271 Downloads
Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have several health disparities, including suboptimal patient-provider interactions, poorer glycemic control, and T2DM complications. Understanding existing interventions for improving T2DM outcomes in this population is critical for reducing disparities.
We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining the effectiveness of interventions in improving T2DM outcomes among patients with LEP in North America. Quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-RCT studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model.
Fifty-four studies, 39 of which reported sufficient data for meta-analysis of glycemic control, were included. The interventions were associated with a statistically significant reduction in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (weighted difference in means, −0.84% [95% CI, −0.97 to −0.71]) that was, however, very heterogeneous across studies (I2 = 95.9%). Heterogeneity was explained by study design (lower efficacy in RCTs than non-RCTs) and by intervention length and delivery mode (greater reduction in interventions lasting <6 months or delivered face-to-face); P < 0.05 for all three covariates. The interventions were also associated in most studies with improvement in knowledge, self-efficacy in diabetes management, quality of life, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Multiple types of interventions are available for T2DM management in patients with LEP. Multicomponent interventions delivered face-to-face seem most effective for glycemic control. More research is needed to better understand other aspects of multicomponent interventions that are critical for improving important outcomes among patients with T2DM and LEP.
KEY WORDSchronic disease diabetes disease management health communication language barriers limited English proficiency
This publication was made possible by funding from the Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
- 1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. US Department of Health and Human Services. National diabetes fact sheet: national estimates and general information on diabetes and prediabetes in the United States, 2011 [Internet]. Atlanta (GA); 2011 [cited 8 Dec 2016]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/ndfs_2011.pdf.
- 12.Pandya C, Batalova J, McHugh M. Limited English proficient individuals in the United States: number, share, growth, and linguistic diversity [Internet]. Washington (DC): Migration Policy Institute; 2011 [cited 2016 Dec 8]. Available from: http://www.migrationinformation.org/integration/LEPdatabrief.pdf.
- 13.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. US Department of Health and Human Services. Medical expenditure panel survey: demographics and health care access and utilization of limited-English-proficient and English-proficient Hispanics [Internet]. Rockville (MD); 2008, Research Findings No. 28 [cited 8 Dec 2016]. Available from: https://meps.ahrq.gov/data_files/publications/rf28/rf28.pdf.
- 21.Schenker Y, Karter AJ, Schillinger D, Warton EM, Adler NE, Moffet HH, et al. The impact of limited English proficiency and physician language concordance on reports of clinical interactions among patients with diabetes: the DISTANCE study. Patient Educ Couns 2010 81(2):222-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 26.Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. Chapter 8. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, (eds). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0; 2011.Google Scholar
- 27.Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses [Internet]. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute [cited 8 Dec 2016]. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
- 30.Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011 64(4):401-6.Google Scholar
- 31.UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet. 1998 352(9131):854-65. Erratum in: Lancet 1998 352(9139):1558.Google Scholar
- 32.Murad MH, Almasri J, Alsawas M, Farah W. Grading the quality of evidence in complex interventions: a guide for evidence-based practitioners. Evid Based Med 2017 22(1):20-2.Google Scholar
- 33.Renders CM, Valk GD, Griffin SJ, Wagner EH, Van Eijk JT, Assendelft WJ. Interventions to improve the management of diabetes in primary care, outpatient, and community settings: a systematic review. Diabetes Care 2001 24(10):1821-33.Google Scholar
- 34.McElroy A, Jezewski MA. Cultural variation in the experience of health and illness. In: Albrecht GL, Fitzpatrick R, Scrimshaw SC, editors. The handbook of social studies in health and medicine. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd; 2000. p. 191-209.Google Scholar
- 35.Tabak RG, Sinclair KA, Baumann AA, Racette SB, Sebert Kuhlmann A, Johnson-Jennings MD, et al. A review of diabetes prevention program translations: use of cultural adaptation and implementation research. Transl Behav Med 2015 5(4):401-14.Google Scholar
- 36.Carter JS, Gilliland SS, Perez GE, Levin S, Broussard BA, Valdez L, et al. Native American Diabetes Project: designing culturally relevant education materials. Diabetes Educ 1997 23(2):133-4, 139.Google Scholar
- 37.Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002 56(2):119-27.Google Scholar
- 38.Durlak JA, DuPre EP. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol 2008 41(3-4):327-50.Google Scholar
- 39.Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J; RIPPLE Study Team. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006 332(7538):413-6.Google Scholar
- 40.Kane EP, Collinsworth AW, Schmidt KL, Brown RM, Snead CA, Barnes SA, et al. Improving diabetes care and outcomes with community health workers. Fam Pract 2016 33(5):523-8.Google Scholar
- 41.Zong J, Batalova, J. The limited English proficient population in the United States [Internet]. Washington (DC): Migration Policy Institute; 2015 [cited 2016 Dec 8]. Available from: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/limited-english-proficient-population-united-states.
- 42.Walker RJ, Strom Williams J, Egede LE. Influence of race, ethnicity and social determinants of health on diabetes outcomes. Am J Med Sci 2016 351(4):366-73.Google Scholar
- 43.Cosgrove S, Moore-Monroy M, Jenkins C, Castillo SR, Williams C, Parris E, et al. Community health workers as an integral strategy in the REACH US program to eliminate health inequities. Health Promot Pract 2014 15(6):795-802.Google Scholar
- 44.Cherrington A, Ayala GX, Amick H, Allison J, Corbie-Smith G, Scarinci I. Implementing the community health worker model within diabetes management: challenges and lessons learned from programs across the United States. Diabetes Educ 2008 34(5):824-33.Google Scholar
- 45.Spiro A, Oo SA, Marable D, Collins JP. A unique model of the community health worker: the MGH Chelsea Community Health Improvement team. Fam Community Health 2012 35(2):147-60.Google Scholar
- 46.Collinsworth A, Vulimiri M, Snead C, Walton J. Community health workers in primary care practice: redesigning health care delivery systems to extend and improve diabetes care in underserved populations. Health Promot Pract 2014 15(2 Suppl):51S-61S.Google Scholar
- 47.Gabriel SE, Normand SL. Getting the methods right: the foundation of patient-centered outcomes research. N Engl J Med 2012 367(9):787-90.Google Scholar
- 48.Njeru JW, Tan EM, St Sauver J, Jacobson DJ, Agunwamba AA, Wilson PM, et al. High rates of diabetes mellitus, pre-diabetes and obesity among Somali immigrants and refugees in Minnesota: a retrospective chart review. J Immigr Minor Health 2016 18(6):1343-9.Google Scholar