Barriers and Facilitators to Real-world Implementation of the Diabetes Prevention Program in Large Healthcare Systems: Lifestyle Coach Perspectives

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Group-based lifestyle change programs based on the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) are associated with clinically significant weight loss and decreases in cardiometabolic risk factors. However, these benefits depend on successful real-world implementation. Studies have examined implementation in community settings, but less is known about integration in healthcare systems, and particularly in large, multi-site systems with the potential for extended reach. OBJECTIVE: To examine the barriers and facilitators to successful DPP implementation in a large multi-site healthcare system. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews, based on the RE-AIM framework, were conducted in person for 30-90 min each. PARTICIPANTS: Past and present DPP lifestyle coaches in the healthcare system identified using purposive sampling. APPROACH: Thematic analysis of qualitative data to identify key factors influencing the success of DPP implementation. An iterative consensus process was used to model the relationships among factors. KEY RESULTS: We conducted 33 interviews across 20 clinic sites serving 12 counties. Participants described six key factors as potential barriers or facilitators to implementation, including (1) Broader Context, including the surrounding physical and sociodemographic context; (2) Institutional Context, including finances, infrastructure, and personnel; (3) Program Provision, including curriculum, administration, cost, goals, and visibility; (4) Recruitment Process, including screening and referrals; (5) Lifestyle Coaches, including their characteristics, behaviors, and morale; and (6) Cohort, including group attrition/retention and interpersonal dynamics. These factors were both highly interconnected in their impact on implementation and widely variable across sites within the healthcare system, as illustrated in our multi-level conceptual framework. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified key factors that could serve as barriers or facilitators in the implementation of DPP in large healthcare systems, from the perspective of lifestyle coaches. With further examination, the conceptual model presented here may be used for planning and managing the implementation of group-based behavioral interventions in these settings.

Validation of living with chronic illness scale in a type 2 diabetes mellitus population

“…The impact of DM is not only physical but also psychosocial, as the disease requires comprehensive involvement by healthcare services, which must focus both on clinical symptoms and on how the patient copes with the disease [ 6 ]. In this field, organisations such as the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association recommend that persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) should seek to achieve self-management on the basis of shared decision-making and on lifestyle modification [ 7 ].…”

Delivering the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) in primary care: Experiences of healthcare professionals

“…A mechanism for sharing of information and learning between experienced and novice HCPs, and between areas of provision may be beneficial 23 . An active cooperation between researchers, implementers and policymakers might help avoid potential deviations from protocol and reduced effectiveness of diabetes remission programmes if scaled up, 25 while allowing flexibility to adapt it to specific contexts that may vary by sites or regions 26 …”

Clinical Insight on Semaglutide for Chronic Weight Management in Adults: Patient Selection and Special Considerations

“… 4 , 8 , 9 However, translation and implementation of ILI into clinical and community settings has been challenging due to time, knowledge, and resource limitations. 10 ILI delivered in these settings is associated with more modest average weight losses of 4–5% 11 , 12 with 36% of participants achieving a ≥5% initial weight loss. 12 While a ≥5% initial weight loss is associated with health benefits, larger weight losses produce even greater improvements in health parameters, 8 , 9 , 13 , 14 and some obesity-related conditions, such as obstructive sleep apnea and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, require a 10–20% weight loss for clinical improvements.…”