Community Servings: Food as Medicine for Diabetes

Diabetes

Food insecurity, defined as difficulty accessing food owing to cost, affects 1 in 5 diabetes patients. To address this, the investigators are conducting a pilot randomized controlled trial of medically tailored meal delivery (MTM). The pilot study has two specific aims: Aim 1: To determine the effect of receiving MTM on dietary quality for food insecure diabetes patients with hyperglycemia Aim 2: To determine the feasibility and acceptability of the program as a medical intervention and refine the program as needed for testing in larger studies. This study is a crossover randomized controlled pilot trial, where approximately 50 participants, 25 in each arm, will be randomized to receipt of 12 weeks of MTM, to begin immediately, or waitlist control. After 12 weeks, the groups will crossover, with the waitlist control group now receiving 12 weeks of MTM. At baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks, the participants will complete assessments of their dietary quality (HEI score), psychosocial measures such as diabetes distress and food insecurity, along with measures of body mass index, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c, and lipids.

a. Historical background The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that there are currently 29 million people with diabetes and 86 million people with pre-diabetes in the U.S. One in 10 Americans has diabetes now, and, if current trends continue, 1 in 3 Americans will have diabetes by 2050. This chronic disease significantly impacts both quality of life and rapidly rising national healthcare costs. The estimated cost of diabetes in the U.S. in 2014 was $265 billion with $176 billion in direct medical costs and $89 billion is indirect medical costs (disability, work loss, premature mortality). Medical expenses for people with diabetes are 2.3 times higher than for people without diabetes. Food insecurity, defined as limited access to nutritious food due to cost, has been associated with increased prevalence of diabetes and worse diabetes control. Food insecurity may worsen diabetes by decreasing consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables and increasing consumption of inexpensive, calorie-dense food, and which in turn leads to greater Hemoglobin A1c, an indicator of hyperglycemia, over time. c. Rationale behind the proposed research, and potential benefits to participants and/or society Approximately 20% of diabetes patients report food insecurity, a number that increases to over 25% among those with the worst metabolic control.5 The prevalence of food insecurity is also 20% in the MGH Population we surveyed (data not yet published). Hyperglycemia is particularly responsive to dietary changes,8 yet few interventions have attempted to address food insecurity in diabetes care. Prior studies have examined the impact of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp Program), but have not found important improvements in diabetes outcomes for participants9. This may be because neighborhood access to produce and other high quality food is low for many SNAP participants, or because making healthy food choices is difficult in resource-constrained environments. Additionally, recent sociological work has shown that expecting low-income women to cook healthy meals for their families induces a significant burden, and the burden of these expectations may drive less healthy food choices. Additionally, while significant time is needed for healthy food preparation, low-income patients often face limited leisure time, and multiple competing demands for both time and financial resources. Alternatively, direct provision of healthy foods was incidentally noted to improve diabetes outcomes in a prior randomized controlled trial, but this study was not conducted with the goal of addressing food insecurity. In this study, we propose to test whether home delivery of freshly prepared meals specifically tailored to the needs of diabetes patients improves their dietary quality. We hypothesize that the delivery of the meals will help them eat more healthily and improve the food security of participants. Secondary outcomes in this pilot study will be weight and metabolic control, along with psychological aspects of diabetes care. Aim 1: To evaluate the effectiveness of receiving Community Servings meals on dietary quality for food insecure diabetes patients with severe hyperglycemia (HbA1c \> 8.0%) H1. Primary outcome. Healthy Eating Index 2010 (HEI) score: We hypothesize that the CS group will demonstrate greater improvements in dietary quality, as assessed by HEI score, at 12 weeks, compared with usual care. The sample size of 50 provides 80% power to detect a 5 point difference between the CS and usual care groups, assuming an 11 point standard deviation and accounting for a 10% drop-out rate. H1b. Secondary exploratory outcomes. Medical outcomes: We hypothesize that compared with usual care, CS group participants will improve HbA1c, blood pressure, weight, and lipids from baseline at the end of the intervention. H1c. Behavioral and psychosocial outcomes: Because meal provision will reduce stress related to procuring healthy meals, and free up household resources that would otherwise be spent on food, we hypothesize that compared with usual care, the CS groups will have greater improvements from baseline in patient-reported outcomes of diabetes distress and material need security. Aim 2: To evaluate the feasibility of providing meals and patient experience with the CS program, particularly focusing on factors that determine acceptability, continuation, and scalability We will use a mixed methods approach using participant structured interviews and surveys to assess engagement and satisfaction with the program, and participant interviews or focus groups to compare responders and non-responders. We will also collect quantitative indicators of feasibility and implementation such as percent of meals delivered and consumed, enrollment and persistence with the program, and logistical issues in order to plan for a future full-scale intervention.

United States

Participants by arm

Withdrawals & dropouts