Background: People with diabetes are at greater risk for comorbid cardiovascular disease, end stage organ damage, disability, and early death. There is substantial evidence that individualizing self-care education, such as eating a healthy diet, greatly improves diabetes management. Objective: The purpose of this paper is to review the outcomes of a diabetes education program offered to underserved women in the Southwestern United States. Methods: Four weekly nutrition classes were individualized and taught at a nonprofit organization in the southwest United States. Behavior change was measured using the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) tool. Classes were advertised via the center’s monthly class calendar and fliers. A total of nine participants (N=9) came to every class and took the SDSCA survey before and after class instruction. Results: Descriptive statistics and two 2-tailed t-tests with the critical value set at p<0.05 were used for data analysis. The participants were Hispanic women, most between the ages of 40-49, and had an income between $0-14,000. The mean difference between the variables of both general diet and specific diet pre and post-tests were significantly different from zero. The assumptions of normality and homogeneity were met. The results of both two-tailed paired sample t-tests were significant suggesting the means of general and specific diet pre-tests were significantly lower than the means of the general and specific diet post-tests. Discussion: The assumptions of normality and homogeneity were met and the results were significant. The pre-intervention scores for both categories were statistically significantly lower than the post-intervention scores for both categories. Thus, the desired outcome of helping clients within the organization modify, adapt, or change self-care behaviors related to diet was met.

Purpose: The purpose of this project was to implement a change in workflow to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and improve Meaningful Use scores in a primary care setting.

Background and Significance: CRC is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States among men and women. Current CRC screening rates remain low, even with advanced screening options available. Meaningful Use sets specific objectives for health care providers to achieve. Documenting CRC screening status and recommending CRC screenings to patients is one of the objectives of Meaningful Use and is considered a Clinical Quality Measure (HealthIT.gov). Factors that lead to CRC screening include primary care providers (PCPs) raising the topic, involving support staff, involving patients in the decision-making process, and setting alerts in electronic health records (EHRs).

Methods: The Health Belief Model and Ottawa Model of Research Use helped guide this project. The project took place at a private primary care practice. The focus was on patients between the ages of 50 and 75 years old meeting criteria for CRC. Five PCPS and five medical assistants (MAs) chose to participate in the study. Participants were given pre and post Practice Culture Assessment (PCA) surveys to measure perceptions of the practice culture. The project included a three-part practice change: PCP and MA education about CRC screening guidelines, EHR documentation and reminders, and a change of patient visit workflow which included having MAs review patient's CRC screening status before they were seen by the PCP and handing out CRC screening brochures when appropriate. PCPs then ordered the appropriate CRC screening, and the MA documented the screening in the EHR under a designated location. CRC Screening Project Evaluation Forms were completed by MAs after each patient visit.

Outcomes: No significant difference from pre to post survey satisfaction scores were found (t (8) = - 1.542, p= = .162). Means of quantitative data were reported from the CRC screening evaluation forms; N=91. The most common method of screening chosen was colonoscopy, 87%. A strong correlation was found (r (-.293) = .01, p<.05) between receiving a CRC brochure and choosing a form of screening. Meaningful Use scores pre and post project are pending.

Conclusion: Patients are more likely to choose a screening method when the topic is raised in a primary care setting. Continued staff education on workflow is important to sustain this change. Further research is needed to evaluate cost effectiveness and sustainability of this practice change.