Dataset Information

Development and Performance of a Web-Based Tool to Adjust Urine Toxicology Testing Frequency: Retrospective Study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Several pain management guidelines recommend regular urine drug testing (UDT) in patients who are being treated with chronic opioid analgesic therapy (COAT) to monitor compliance and improve safety. Guidelines also recommend more frequent testing in patients who are at high risk of adverse events related to COAT; however, there is no consensus on how to identify high-risk patients or on the testing frequency that should be used. Using previously described clinical risk factors for UDT results that are inconsistent with the prescribed COAT, we developed a web-based tool to adjust drug testing frequency in patients treated with COAT. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to evaluate a risk stratification tool, the UDT Randomizer, to adjust UDT frequency in patients treated with COAT. METHODS:Patients were stratified using an algorithm based on readily available clinical risk factors into categories of presumed low, moderate, high, and high+ risk of presenting with UDT results inconsistent with the prescribed COAT. The algorithm was integrated in a website to facilitate adoption across practice sites. To test the performance of this algorithm, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated with COAT between June 2016 and June 2017. The primary outcome was compliance with the prescribed COAT as defined by UDT results consistent with the prescribed COAT. RESULTS:979 drug tests (867 UDT, 88.6%; 112 oral fluid testing, 11.4%) were performed in 320 patients. An inconsistent drug test result was registered in 76/979 tests (7.8%). The incidences of inconsistent test results across the risk tool categories were 7/160 (4.4%) in the low risk category, 32/349 (9.2%) in the moderate risk category, 28/338 (8.3%) in the high risk category, and 9/132 (6.8%) in the high+ risk category. Generalized estimating equation analysis demonstrated that the moderate risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% CI 0.9-5.0; P=.10), high risk (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.8-5.0; P=.14), and high risk+ (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.7-5.6; P=.20) categories were associated with a nonsignificantly increased risk of inconsistency vs the low risk category. CONCLUSIONS:The developed tool stratified patients during individual visits into risk categories of presenting with drug testing results inconsistent with the prescribed COAT; the higher risk categories showed nonsignificantly higher risk compared to the low risk category. Further development of the tool with additional risk factors in a larger cohort may further clarify and enhance its performance.

SUBMITTER: Chapman KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7203611 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and Performance of a Web-Based Tool to Adjust Urine Toxicology Testing Frequency: Retrospective Study.

Chapman Kenneth B KB Pas Martijn M MM Abrar Diana D Day Wesley W Vissers Kris C KC van Helmond Noud N

JMIR medical informatics 20200422 4

<h4>Background</h4>Several pain management guidelines recommend regular urine drug testing (UDT) in patients who are being treated with chronic opioid analgesic therapy (COAT) to monitor compliance and improve safety. Guidelines also recommend more frequent testing in patients who are at high risk of adverse events related to COAT; however, there is no consensus on how to identify high-risk patients or on the testing frequency that should be used. Using previously described clinical risk factors ...[more]

PMID: 32319958

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Alcohol use is a major public health concern associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Health professionals in primary care commonly see patients with a range of alcohol-related risks and problems, providing an ideal opportunity for screening and brief intervention (BI). OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to develop a prototype for a Web-based tool for use by primary care health professionals (eg, doctors and nurses) to communicate alcohol harm risk to their patients and to engage with them regarding ways this risk could be reduced. METHODS:Following conceptualization and development of prototype wireframes, formative work and pretesting were undertaken. For the formative work, focus groups and key informant interviews were conducted with potential end users of the risk communication tool, including health professionals and consumers. The focus groups and interviews explored perceptions of alcohol risk communication and obtained feedback on the initial prototype. For pretesting, participants (primary care doctors and nurses) completed a Web-based survey followed by a period of pretesting before completion of a follow-up survey. The study was designed to gain feedback on the tool's performance in real-world settings as well as its relevance, ease of use, and any suggested refinements. RESULTS:In the formative work stage, 11 key informants and 7 consumers participated in either focus groups or individual interviews. Participants were very positive about the prototype and believed that it would be useful and acceptable in practice. Key informants identified that the key point of difference with the tool was that it provided all the pieces in 1 place (ie, assessment, interpretation, and resources to support change). Participants provided feedback on how the tool could be improved, and these suggestions were incorporated into the prototype where possible. In the pretesting stage, 7 people (5 doctors and 2 primary care nurses) completed the pretesting. Participants reported that the tool provided a useful framework for an intervention, that it would be acceptable to patients, that it was easy to use, that they would be likely to use it in practice, and that there were no technical issues. CONCLUSIONS:The alcohol risk communication tool was found to be acceptable and has the potential to increase the confidence of health professionals in assessing risk and providing BI.

Project description:BackgroundDeciding whether and how to disclose one's autism at work is complex, especially for autistic youth and young adults who are newly entering the labor market and still learning important decision-making and self-determination skills. Autistic youth and young adults may benefit from tools to support disclosure processes at work; however, to our knowledge, no evidence-based, theoretically grounded tool exists specifically for this population. There is also limited guidance on how to pursue the development of such a tool in collaboration with knowledge users.ObjectiveThis study aimed to co-design a prototype of a disclosure decision aid tool with and for Canadian autistic youth and young adults, explore the perceived usability of the prototype (usefulness, satisfaction, and ease of use) and make necessary revisions, and outline the process used to achieve the aforementioned objectives.MethodsTaking a patient-oriented research approach, we engaged 4 autistic youths and young adults as collaborators on this project. Prototype development was guided by co-design principles and strategies, and tool content was informed by a previous needs assessment led by our team, the autistic collaborators' lived experiences, considering intersectionality, research on knowledge translation (KT) tool development, and recommendations from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. We co-designed a web-based PDF prototype. To assess perceived usability and experiences with the prototype, we conducted 4 participatory design and focus group Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) sessions with 19 Canadian autistic youths and young adults aged 16 to 29 (mean 22.8, SD 4.1) years. We analyzed the data using a combined conventional (inductive) and modified framework method (deductive) analysis to map the data onto usability indicators (usefulness, satisfaction, and ease of use). Grounded in participants' feedback, considering factors of feasibility and availability of resources, and ensuring tool fidelity, we revised the prototype.ResultsWe developed 4 categories pertaining to the perceived usability of and participant experiences with the prototype: past disclosure experiences, prototype information and activities, prototype design and structure, and overall usability. Participant feedback was favorable and indicative of the tool's potential impact and usability. The usability indicator requiring the most attention was ease of use, which was prioritized when revising the prototype. Our findings highlight the importance of engaging knowledge users throughout the entire prototype co-design and testing processes; incorporating co-design strategies and principles; and having content informed by relevant theories, evidence, and knowledge users' experiences.ConclusionsWe outline an innovative co-design process that other researchers, clinicians, and KT practitioners may consider when developing KT tools. We also developed a novel, evidence-based, and theoretically informed web-based disclosure decision aid tool that may help autistic youth and young adults navigate disclosure processes and improve their transitional outcomes as they enter the workforce.

Dataset Information

Development and Performance of a Web-Based Tool to Adjust Urine Toxicology Testing Frequency: Retrospective Study.

Publications

Development and Performance of a Web-Based Tool to Adjust Urine Toxicology Testing Frequency: Retrospective Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets