Dataset Information

An Intervention to Increase Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: Results of a Randomized Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Emergency departments (EDs) have the potential to promote critical public and preventive health interventions. Cervical cancer (CC) screening has been a cornerstone of preventive health efforts for decades. Approximately 20% of U.S. women are not adherent with CC screening guidelines-considerably below the U.S. Federal Government's target. ED patients are disproportionately nonadherent with CC screening guidelines. The ED, therefore, is an optimal setting to target women with an intervention that promotes CC screening. OBJECTIVES:To assess the feasibility and potential efficacy of an intervention, grounded in behavioral change theory, to promote uptake of CC screening among ED patients. METHODS:Design: Randomized clinical trial pilot study; Patients: Women aged 21-65 years that were identified in the ED to be nonadherent with CC screening recommendations; Setting: Single center urban academic ED. RESULTS:Among enrolled participants, 355 (79%) were determined to be adherent with screening recommendations and 95 (21%) were determined to be either nonadherent or have uncertain adherence. Among the nonadherent/uncertain group, 47 were randomized to the control condition (referral only) and 48 were randomized to the intervention condition. Thirty-six percent of participants in the control condition received or scheduled screening during the follow-up period. In the intervention condition, 43% received or scheduled screening during the follow-up period-a 19% relative improvement over the control condition. CONCLUSION:This pilot study demonstrates feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a behavioral intervention to increase uptake of CC screening among ED patients.

SUBMITTER: Adler D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6904518 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An Intervention to Increase Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: Results of a Randomized Pilot Study.

Adler David D Abar Beau B Wood Nancy N Bonham Adrienne A

The Journal of emergency medicine 20191005 6

<h4>Background</h4>Emergency departments (EDs) have the potential to promote critical public and preventive health interventions. Cervical cancer (CC) screening has been a cornerstone of preventive health efforts for decades. Approximately 20% of U.S. women are not adherent with CC screening guidelines-considerably below the U.S. Federal Government's target. ED patients are disproportionately nonadherent with CC screening guidelines. The ED, therefore, is an optimal setting to target women with ...[more]

PMID: 31594738

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesIn this study, Increasing Viral Testing in the Emergency Department (InVITED), the authors investigated if a brief intervention about human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) risk-taking behaviors and drug use and misuse in addition to a self-administered risk assessment, compared to a self-administered risk assessment alone, increased uptake of combined screening for HIV and HCV, self-perception of HIV/HCV risk, and impacted beliefs and opinions on HIV/HCV screening.MethodsInVITED was a randomized, controlled trial conducted at two urban emergency departments (EDs) from February 2011 to March 2012. ED patients who self-reported drug use within the past 3 months were invited to enroll. Drug misuse severity and need for a brief or more intensive intervention was assessed using the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Participants were randomly assigned to one of two study arms: a self-administered HIV/HCV risk assessment alone (control arm) or the assessment plus a brief intervention about their drug misuse and screening for HIV/HCV (intervention arm). Beliefs on the value of combined HIV/HCV screening, self-perception of HIV/HCV risk, and opinions on HIV/HCV screening in the ED were measured in both study arms before the HIV/HCV risk assessment (pre), after the assessment in the control arm, and after the brief intervention in the intervention arm (post). Participants in both study arms were offered free combined rapid HIV/HCV screening. Uptake of screening was compared by study arm. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate factors related to uptake of screening.ResultsOf the 395 participants in the study, the median age was 28 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 23 to 38 years), 44.8% were female, 82.3% had ever been tested for HIV, and 67.3% had ever been tested for HCV. Uptake of combined rapid HIV/HCV screening was nearly identical by study arm (64.5% vs. 65.2%; Δ = -0.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -10.1% to 8.7%). Of the 256 screened, none had reactive HIV antibody tests, but seven (2.7%) had reactive HCV antibody tests. Multivariable logistic regression analysis results indicated that uptake of screening was not related to study arm assignment, total ASSIST drug scores, need for an intervention for drug misuse, or HIV/HCV sexual risk assessment scores. However, uptake of screening was greater among participants who indicated placing a higher value on combined rapid HIV/HCV screening for themselves and all ED patients and those with higher levels of perceived HIV/HCV risk. Uptake of combined rapid HIV/HCV screening was not related to changes in beliefs regarding the value of combined HIV/HCV screening or self-perceived HIV/HCV risk (post- vs. pre-risk assessment with or without a brief intervention). Opinions regarding the ED as a venue for combined rapid HIV/HCV screening were not related to uptake of screening.ConclusionsUptake of combined rapid HIV/HCV screening is high and considered valuable among drug using and misusing ED patients with little concern about the ED as a screening venue. The brief intervention investigated in this study does not appear to change beliefs regarding screening, self-perceived risk, or uptake of screening for HIV/HCV in this population. Initial beliefs regarding the value of screening and self-perceived risk for these infections predict uptake of screening.

Project description:We compare rates of rapid HIV testing, test offer, and acceptance in an urban emergency department (ED) when conducted by dedicated HIV counselors versus current members of the ED staff.The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room [USHER] trial is a prospective randomized controlled trial that implemented an HIV screening program in the ED of an urban tertiary medical center. ED patients were screened and consented for trial enrollment by an USHER research assistant. Eligible subjects were randomized to rapid HIV testing (oral OraQuick) offered by a dedicated counselor (counselor arm) or by an ED provider (provider arm). In the counselor arm, counselors-without other clinical responsibilities-assumed nearly all testing-related activities (consent, counseling, delivery of test results). In the provider arm, trained ED emergency service assistants (nursing assistants) consented and tested the participant in the context of other ED-related responsibilities. In this arm, ED house officers, physician assistants, or attending physicians provided HIV test results to trial participants. Outcome measures were rates of HIV testing and test offer among individuals consenting for study participation. Among individuals offered the test, test acceptance was also measured.From February 2007 through July 2008, 8,187 eligible patients were approached in the ED, and 4,855 (59%) consented and were randomized to trial participation. The mean age was 37 years, 65% were women, and 42% were white. The overall testing rate favored the counselor arm (57% versus 27%; P<.001); 80% (1,959/2,446) of subjects in the counselor arm were offered an HIV test compared with 36% (861/2,409) in the provider arm (P<.001). HIV test acceptance was slightly higher in the provider arm (counselor arm 71% versus provider arm 75%; P = .025).Routine rapid HIV testing in the ED was accomplished more frequently by dedicated HIV counselors than by ED staff in the course of routine clinical work. Without dedicated staff, HIV testing in this setting may not be truly routine.

Project description:IntroductionOpioid use disorder (OUD) and related comorbid conditions are highly prevalent among patients presenting to emergency department (ED) settings. Research has developed few comprehensive disease management strategies for at-risk patients presenting to the ED that both decrease illicit opioid use and improve initiation and retention in medication treatment for OUD (MOUD).MethodsThe research team conducted a pilot pragmatic clinical trial that randomized 40 patients presenting to a single ED to a collaborative care intervention (n = 20) versus usual care control (n = 20) conditions. Interviewers blinded to patient intervention and control group status followed-up with participants at 1, 3, and 6 months after presentation to the ED. The 3-month Emergency Department Longitudinal Integrated Care (ED-LINC) collaborative care intervention for patients at risk for OUD included: 1) a Brief Negotiated Interview at bedside, 2) overdose education and facilitation of MOUD, 3) longitudinal proactive care management, 4) utilization of the statewide health information exchange platform for 24/7 tracking of recurrent ED utilization, and 5) weekly caseload supervision that incorporated measurement-based care treatment assessment with stepped-up care for patients with recalcitrant symptoms.ResultsOverall, the ED-LINC intervention was feasibly delivered and acceptable to patients. The pilot study achieved >80% follow-up rates at 1, 3, and 6 months. In adjusted longitudinal mixed model regression analyses, no statistically significant differences existed in days of opioid use over the past 30 days for ED-LINC intervention patients when compared to patients receiving usual care (incidence-rate ratio (IRR) 1.50, 95% CI 0.54-4.16). The unadjusted mean number of days of illicit opioid use decreased at the 1-month and 3-month follow-up time points for both groups. ED-LINC intervention patients had increased rates of MOUD initiation compared to control patients (50% versus 30%); intervention versus control comparisons did not achieve statistical significance, although power to detect significant differences in the pilot was limited.ConclusionsThe ED-LINC intervention for patients with OUD can be feasibly implemented and warrants testing in larger scale, adequately powered randomized pragmatic clinical trial investigations.Clinicaltrialsgov NCT03699085.

Dataset Information

An Intervention to Increase Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: Results of a Randomized Pilot Study.

Publications

An Intervention to Increase Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening Among Emergency Department Patients: Results of a Randomized Pilot Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets