Diabetes management among underserved older adults through telemedicine and community health workers
Abstract
Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) disproportionately affects older adults from marginalized communities. In the United States, the prevalence of DM in ages ≥65 years is twofold higher than the national average for adult populations. Telemedicine and community health workers (CHWs) are emerging diabetes care models but their impact on older adults with limited resources are relatively neglected within the medical literature. Objectives: The purpose of this systematic review was to explore the impact of telemedicine and CHW interventions for improving A1C levels and self-management behaviors among underserved older adults with DM. Data sources: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane databases using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses as a reporting guideline. Conclusions: Diabetes self-management education (DSME) administered through telemedicine and CHW interventions were effective for improving A1C levels, self-care adherence, and patient and provider satisfaction among adults aged ≥50 years. Common barriers to diabetes care include inadequate resources, lack of transportation, inconsistent means of communications, social isolation, and low motivation. Community health workers and telemedicine were effective in improving disease management and optimizing care coordination within the vulnerable adult populations. Implications for practice: Well-coordinated, evidence-based, and population-centered interventions can overcome the unique disparities experienced by underserved older adults with diabetes. Incorporating DSME-guided telemedicine and CHW interventions into primary care can mitigate diabetes-related complications in older populations. The lack of evidence specific to adults aged ≥65 years calls for a universally accepted age range when referring to older adults in future research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Virtual care interventions had a greater effect among adults aged 50 years or older, with better treatment outcomes compared to younger adults, as reported in five reviews.
“Virtual care interventions were found to have greater effect among adults who were 50 years or older, with better treatment outcomes compared to younger adults reported in 5 reviews [21, 22, 26, 29, 36].”
From Effect of virtual care in type 2 diabetes management – a systematic umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [26]
One review reported that virtual care was effective in enhancing patient-provider interactions.
“one review [26] reported virtual care was effective in enhancing patient-provider interactions.”
From Effect of virtual care in type 2 diabetes management – a systematic umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [26]
Cost-effectiveness outcomes compared markedly different approaches, revealing a wide variation in costs associated with virtual care.
“Cost-effectiveness outcomes compared markedly different approaches, revealing a wide variation in costs associated with virtual care [26].”
From Effect of virtual care in type 2 diabetes management – a systematic umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [26]
Virtual care increased older adults' adherence to self-care activities such as blood glucose level checks, diet, exercise, foot and eye checks.
“Virtual care increased older adults’ adherence to self-care activities such as blood glucose Level (BGL) checks, diet, exercise, foot and eye checks [26].”
From Effect of virtual care in type 2 diabetes management – a systematic umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [26]
Cites
Sinclair, A., Morley, J. E., Rodriguez-Mañas, L., Paolisso, G., Bayer, T., Zeyfang, A., Bourdel-Marchasson, I., Vischer, U., Woo, J., Chapman, I., et al. (2012) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2012.04.012 · Cited by 422 · see citing works
Introduction: <i>Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020</i>
(2020) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc20-sint · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ravi, S., Meyerowitz-Katz, G., Yung, C., Ayre, J., McCaffery, K., Maberly, G., & Bonner, C. (2025) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-025-12496-0 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“Six reviews reported the effect on self-management or care [22, 23, 26, 27, 35, 48], and 6 reported on self-efficacy [22, 27, 35, 36, 43, 46].”
Influential
- Authors
- Marsh, Z., Nguyen, Y., Teegala, Y., & Cotter, V. T.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Rocking Horse Community Health Center (RHCHC), Springfield, Ohio
- Corresponding author
- Marsh, Zyrene
- Venue
- Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners
- Published
- 2021-04-07
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26-31
- ISSN
- 2327-6886 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-6924
- OpenAlex
- W3155458844
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 2.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Keywords
- diabetes mellitus, older adults, underserved populations, telemedicine, community health workers, diabetes self-management education, HbA1c, self-care adherence, health disparities, care coordination, barriers to diabetes care, social isolation, transportation barriers
- MeSH terms
- Self-Management, Aged, Community Health Workers, Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, Primary Health Care, United States, Telemedicine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review