scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
These Standards provide evidence for all diabetes self-management education providers including those that do not plan to seek reimbursement for DSMES, and identify the need to provide person-centered services that embrace the ever-increasing technological engagement platforms and systems.
Abstract
By the most recent estimates, 30.3 million people in the U.S. have diabetes. An estimated 23.1 million have been diagnosed with diabetes and 7.2 million are believed to be living with undiagnosed diabetes. At the same time, 84.1 million people are at increased risk for type 2 diabetes. Thus, more than 114 million Americans are at risk for developing the devastating complications of diabetes (1). Diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) is a critical element of care for all people with diabetes. DSMES is the ongoing process of facilitating the knowledge, skills, and ability necessary for diabetes self-care, as well as activities that assist a person in implementing and sustaining the behaviors needed to manage his or her condition on an ongoing basis, beyond or outside of formal self-management training. In previous National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support (Standards), DSMS and DSME were defined separately, but these Standards aim to reflect the value of ongoing support and multiple services. The Standards define timely, evidence-based, quality DSMES services that meet or exceed the Medicare diabetes self-management training (DSMT) regulations, however, these Standards do not guarantee reimbursement. These Standards provide evidence for all diabetes self-management education providers including those that do not plan to seek reimbursement for DSMES. The current Standards’ evidence clearly identifies the need to provide person-centered services that embrace the ever-increasing technological engagement platforms and systems. The hope is that payers will view these Standards as a tool for reviewing DSMES reimbursement requirements and consider change to align with the way their beneficiaries’ engagement preferences have evolved. Research confirms that less than 5% of Medicare beneficiaries utilize their DSMES benefits (2,3). Changes in reimbursement policies stand to increase DSMES access and utilization, which will result in positive impact to beneficiaries’ clinical outcomes, quality of …

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

The effectiveness of the teach-back method on adherence and self-management in health education for people with chronic disease: A systematic review

TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review examined the evidence on using the teach-back method in health education programs for improving adherence and self-management of people with chronic diseases, and concluded that the use of the teachback method showed positive effects in a wide range of health care outcomes although these were not always statistically significant.
Journal ArticleDOI

Mapping the Evidence on the Effectiveness of Telemedicine Interventions in Diabetes, Dyslipidemia, and Hypertension: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

TL;DR: It is indicated that telemedicine has the potential to improve clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes and subgroup-specific effectiveness rates favoring certain intervention and population characteristics were found, and the low GRADE ratings indicate that evidence can be considered as limited.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

10-year follow-up of diabetes incidence and weight loss in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study.

TL;DR: During follow-up after DPP, incidences in the former placebo and metformin groups fell to equal those in theFormer lifestyle group, but the cumulative incidence of diabetes remained lowest in the lifestyle group.
Journal ArticleDOI

The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: a systematic review of the literature.

TL;DR: The review demonstrated that the WHO-5 has high clinimetric validity, can be used as an outcome measure balancing the wanted and unwanted effects of treatments, is a sensitive and specific screening tool for depression and its applicability across study fields is very high.
Related Papers (5)