Patient Experiences with Screening and Assistance for Social Isolation in Primary Care Settings.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Social isolation is a known predictor of mortality that disproportionately affects vulnerable populations in the USA. Although experts began to recognize it as a public health crisis prior to 2020, the novel coronavirus pandemic has accelerated recognition of social isolation as a serious threat to health and well-being.Objective
Examine patient experiences with screening and assistance for social isolation in primary care settings, and whether patient experiences with these activities are associated with the severity of reported social isolation.Design
Cross-sectional survey conducted in 2018.Participants
Adults (N = 251) were recruited from 3 primary care clinics in Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco.Main measures
A modified version of the Berkman-Syme Social Network Index (SNI), endorsed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; items to assess for prior experiences with screening and assistance for social isolation.Key results
In the sample population, 12.4% reported the highest levels of social isolation (SNI = 0/1), compared to 36.7%, 34.7%, and 16.3% (SNI = 2-4, respectively). Most patients had not been asked about social isolation in a healthcare setting (87.3%), despite reporting no discomfort with social isolation screening (93.9%). Neither discomfort with nor participation in prior screening for social isolation was associated with social isolation levels. Desire for assistance with social isolation (3.2%) was associated with a higher level of social isolation (AOR = 6.0, 95% CI, 1.3-28.8), as well as poor or fair health status (AOR = 9.1; 95% CI, 1.3-64.1).Conclusions
In this study, few patients reported being screened previously for social isolation in a primary care setting, despite low levels of discomfort with screening. Providers should consider broadening social isolation screening and referral practices in healthcare settings, especially among sicker and more isolated patients who express higher levels of interest in assistance with social isolation.
SUBMITTER: Tung EL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7853707 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine population-based screening for drug use, yet screening for opioid use disorder (OUD) in primary care occurs rarely, and little is known about barriers primary care teams face.ObjectiveAs part of a multisite randomized trial to provide OUD and behavioral health treatment using the Collaborative Care Model, we supported 10 primary care clinics in implementing routine OUD screening and conducted formative evaluation to characterize early implementation experiences.DesignQualitative formative evaluation.ApproachFormative evaluation included taking detailed observation notes at implementation meetings with individual clinics and debriefings with external facilitators. Observation notes were analyzed weekly using a Rapid Assessment Process guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, with iterative feedback from the study team. After clinics launched OUD screening, we conducted structured fidelity assessments via group interviews with each site to evaluate clinic experiences with routine OUD screening. Data from observation and structured fidelity assessments were combined into a matrix to compare across clinics and identify cross-cutting barriers and promising implementation strategies.Key resultsWhile all clinics had the goal of implementing population-based OUD screening, barriers were experienced across intervention, individual, and clinic setting domains, with compounding effects for telehealth visits. Seven themes emerged characterizing barriers, including (1) challenges identifying who to screen, (2) complexity of the screening tool, (3) staff discomfort and/or hesitancies, (4) workflow barriers that decreased screening follow-up, (5) staffing shortages and turnover, (6) discouragement from low screening yield, and (7) stigma. Promising implementation strategies included utilizing a more universal screening approach, health information technology (HIT), audit and feedback, and repeated staff trainings.ConclusionsIntegrating population-based OUD screening in primary care is challenging but may be made feasible via implementation strategies and tailored practice facilitation that standardize workflows via HIT, decrease stigma, and increase staff confidence regarding OUD.
| S-EPMC9132563 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop a short, patient-administered screening tool that will allow for earlier assessment of prescription opioid dependence (often referred to as addiction) in primary care settings.Design and settingCross-sectional analysis (N = 1,134) from the two-year time point of the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) cohort was used in the scale development.SubjectsParticipants who completed two-year interviews in the POINT study, a prospective cohort study that followed people with chronic noncancer pain over a five-year period, and who were prescribed strong opioids for a minimum of six weeks at baseline.MethodsAn advisory committee provided advice on wording and content for screening in primary care settings. Univariate logistic regression identified individual items that were significantly associated with meeting ICD-11 criteria for prescription opioid dependence. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA) were conducted, and items were reduced to identify a small item set that were discriminative and shared a simple underlying structure.ResultsSixty-four variables associated with ICD-11 criteria for prescription opioid dependence were initially identified. Four rounds of EFA were performed, resulting in five items remaining. CFA identified two possible four-item combinations, with the final combination chosen based on greater item endorsement and the results of goodness-of-fit indices.ConclusionsAddressing prescription opioid dependence is an important part of the global public health challenge surrounding rising opioid-related harm. This study addresses an important initial requisite step to develop a brief screening tool. Further studies are required to validate the tool in clinical settings.
| S-EPMC8204889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCommunity health centers often screen for and address patients' unmet social needs. This study examines the degree to which community health center patients report receiving social needs assistance and compares measures of access and quality between patients who received assistance versus similar patients who did not.MethodsA nationally representative sample of 4,699 nonelderly adults receiving care at community health centers from the 2014-2015 Health Resources and Services Administration Health Center Patient Survey was used, representing 12.6 million patients. The exposure-having "received social needs assistance"-was based on whether a patient received any community health center assistance accessing social programs (e.g., applying for government benefits) or basic needs (e.g., obtaining transportation, housing, food). Using logistic regression models with inverse probability of treatment weights, outcomes for patients who received social needs assistance with similar patients who did not were compared. Study outcomes, reported as absolute adjusted differences, included reporting a community health center as a usual source of care, reporting the emergency department as a usual source of care, perceived quality of care, and willingness to recommend the community health center to others. Data were analyzed in 2020.ResultsOf the sample, 36% reported receiving social needs assistance, where the most common form of assistance was applying for government benefits. Relative to similar patients who did not receive social needs assistance, patients receiving assistance were significantly more likely to report a community health center as their usual source of care (adjusted difference=7.2 percentage points, 95% CI=2.2, 12.1) and to report perceived quality of care as "the best" (adjusted difference=11.1, 95% CI=5.4, 16.9). They were significantly less likely to report the emergency department as their usual source of care (adjusted difference= -4.2, 95% CI= -7.0, -1.3).ConclusionsAs community health centers and other providers consider providing social needs assistance to patients, these results suggest that doing so may be associated with improved access to and quality of care.
| S-EPMC7931986 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether neighbours who share the same family physicians have better cardiovascular and health care outcomes.DesignRetrospective cohort study using administrative health databases.SettingOntario.ParticipantsThe study population included 2,690,482 adult patients cared for by 1710 family physicians.InterventionsAdult residents of Ontario were linked to their family physicians and the geographic distance between patients in the same panel or list was calculated. Using distance between patients within a panel to stratify physicians into quintiles of panel proximity, physicians and patients from close-proximity practices were compared with those from more-distant-proximity practices. Age- and sex-standardized incidence rates and hazard ratios from cause-specific hazards regression models were determined.Main outcome measuresThe occurrence of a major cardiovascular event during a 5-year follow-up period (2008 to 2012).ResultsPatients of panels in the closest-proximity quintile lived an average of 3.9 km from the 10 closest patients in their panel compared with 12.4 km for the 10 closest patients of panels in the distant-proximity quintile. After adjusting for various patient and physician characteristics, patients in the most-distant-proximity practices had a 24% higher rate of cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio=1.24 [95% CI 1.20 to 1.28], P<.001) than patients in the closest-proximity practices. Age- and sex-standardized all-cause mortality and total per patient health care costs were also lowest in the closest-proximity quintile. In sensitivity analyses restricted to large urban communities and to White long-term residents, results were similar.ConclusionThe better cardiovascular outcomes observed in close-proximity panels may be related to a previously unrecognized mechanism of social connectedness that extends the effectiveness of primary care practitioners.
| S-EPMC9470188 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Healthcare services are facing extensive challenges due to the increased proportion of elderly persons and persons with chronic disease. Technology enabled care (TEC) is a collective term for telecare, telehealth, telemedicine, mobile (m)-, digital- and electronic (e) health services. TEC is increasingly seen as a solution to many of the challenges facing the health sector. Patient perspectives may provide a useful evaluation tool for new healthcare technologies that have limited clinical data to support their effectiveness. More studies need to be done to better understand the acceptance of technology in healthcare. This review aim to summarize empirical studies exploring patient experiences with TEC. Findings in this study can be used to better understand what is needed to develop, implement and improve such services. METHODS:Systematic searches were conducted in the Pubmed, Psycinfo, Cinahl, Embase, Cochrane systematic reviews and Cochrane clinical trials databases. These studies were systematically reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, subjected to quality appraisals using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP), and synthesized via integrative analysis. RESULTS:After removal of duplicates, languages other than English, and non-scientific records, 4087 titles and abstracts were screened. After assessment against inclusion and exclusion criteria, 69 records were screened in full-text, and underwent quality appraisal. 21 records were included in the integrative analysis. Patients' experiences with TEC related to 1) technological features, namely functionality and appearance, and 2) evolving independence, namely empowerment, autonomy and security. Technological challenges lead to frustrations and negative experiences, while a stigmatizing appearance lead to patients not using the solution. Through the use of TECs, patients felt more empowered, learning about their condition, increasing awareness to their symptoms and treatment, and feeling more safe and self-efficient. Patient participation was seen as a central aspect of the development of the TECT, as well as when using it. CONCLUSION:This review deepens the understanding of patients' experiences with technology enabled care solutions. Patients' experiences not only relate to the practical/technical element of the device or solution, but to how this impact on their everyday life. Patient participation in development and planned use of such solutions should be considered an integral part in healthcare quality initiatives.
| S-EPMC7446109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterest is growing in interventions to address social needs in clinical settings. However, little is known about patients' perceptions and experiences with these interventions.ObjectiveTo evaluate patients' experiences and patient-reported outcomes of a primary care-based intervention to help patients connect with community resources using trained volunteer advocates.DesignQualitative telephone interviews with patients who had worked with the volunteer advocates. Sample and recruitment targets were equally distributed between patients who had at least one reported success in meeting an identified need and those who had no reported needs met, based on the database used to document patient encounters.ParticipantsOne hundred two patients.InterventionsPatients at the study clinic were periodically screened for social needs. If needs were identified, they were referred to a trained volunteer advocate who further assessed their needs, provided them with resource referrals, and followed up with them on whether their need was met.ApproachThematic analysis was used to code the data.Key resultsInterviewed patients appreciated the services offered, especially the follow-up. Patients' ability to access the resource to which they were referred was enhanced by assistance with filling out forms, calling community resources, and other types of navigation. Patients also reported that interacting with the advocates made them feel listened to and cared for, which they perceived as noteworthy in their lives.ConclusionsThis patient-reported information provides key insights into a human-centered intervention in a clinical environment. Our findings highlight what works in clinical interventions addressing social needs and provide outcomes that are difficult to measure using existing quantitative metrics. Patients experienced the intervention as a therapeutic relationship/working alliance, a type of care that correlates with positive outcomes such as treatment adherence and quality of life. These insights will help design more patient-centered approaches to providing holistic patient care.
| S-EPMC7018904 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo investigate patient experiences with pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing.MethodsPatients were offered PGx testing through a study on pharmacist-assisted delivery of PGx testing and invited to complete pre- and post-testing surveys about their experience.ResultsOf 63 patients tested, 17 completed the baseline survey (27%). Interest in testing was mostly impacted by desire to inform selection of best treatment (n = 13). Seven of 12 patients that completed the follow-up survey indicated that their provider discussed the test result with them. Five patients understood their test result very or somewhat well. All would be likely to have PGx testing again.ConclusionPatients perceived PGx testing to be useful, though more effort may be needed to improve patient-provider communication of test results.
| S-EPMC5558503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe purpose of the study was to explore patients' experiences and perspectives obtaining telemedicine medication abortion (TeleMAB) through their primary care health system.MethodsWe conducted in-depth telephone interviews with 14 English-, Spanish-, and/or Portuguese-speaking patients who received a TeleMAB between July 2020 and December 2021, within a large primary care safety-net community health system in Massachusetts. We created and piloted a semistructured interview guide informed by patient-clinician communication frameworks and prior studies on patient experiences with TeleMAB. We analyzed data using reflexive thematic analysis and summarized main themes.ResultsOverall, participants found TeleMAB services in their primary care health system acceptable, positive, and easy. Participants discussed how TeleMAB supported their ability to exercise control, autonomy, and flexibility, and decreased barriers experienced with in-clinic care. Many participants perceived their primary care health system as the place to go for any pregnancy-related health care need, including abortion. They valued receiving abortion care from their established health care team within the context of ongoing social and medical concerns.ConclusionsPatients find TeleMAB from their primary care health system acceptable and beneficial. Primary care settings can integrate TeleMAB services to decrease care silos, normalize abortion as a part of comprehensive primary care, and improve access through remote care offerings. TeleMAB supports patients' access and autonomy, with the potential to benefit many people of reproductive age.
| S-EPMC11233084 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocial Media, such as Yelp, provides rich information of consumer experience. Previous studies suggest that Yelp can serve as a new source to study patient experience. However, the lack of a corpus of patient reviews causes a major bottleneck for applying computational techniques.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to create a corpus of patient experience (COPE) and report descriptive statistics to characterize COPE.MethodsYelp reviews about health care-related businesses were extracted from the Yelp Academic Dataset. Natural language processing (NLP) tools were used to split reviews into sentences, extract noun phrases and adjectives from each sentence, and generate parse trees and dependency trees for each sentence. Sentiment analysis techniques and Hadoop were used to calculate a sentiment score of each sentence and for parallel processing, respectively.ResultsCOPE contains 79,173 sentences from 6914 patient reviews of 985 health care facilities near 30 universities in the United States. We found that patients wrote longer reviews when they rated the facility poorly (1 or 2 stars). We demonstrated that the computed sentiment scores correlated well with consumer-generated ratings. A consumer vocabulary to describe their health care experience was constructed by a statistical analysis of word counts and co-occurrences in COPE.ConclusionsA corpus called COPE was built as an initial step to utilize social media to understand patient experiences at health care facilities. The corpus is available to download and COPE can be used in future studies to extract knowledge of patients' experiences from their perspectives. Such information can subsequently inform and provide opportunity to improve the quality of health care.
| S-EPMC4526973 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to establish the predictive ability of demographic and clinical factors in diagnosing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Qatar's publicly funded primary care settings.MethodsReverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) test and COVID-19 screening data (COVID-19 related factors) were extracted from electronic medical records for all individuals who visited a primary health care centre in Qatar between 15th March to 15th June 2020. Data analysis was undertaken to assess the validity of individual factors in predicting a positive rt-PCR test.ResultsFever/history of fever [N= 1471 (54.7%); OR 4.6 (95% CI 4.16 - 5.08)], followed by cough [N=1020 (37.9%); OR 1.82 (95% CI 1.65 - 2)] and headache [N=372 (13.8%); OR 1.45 (95% CI 1.27 - 1.67)] were the most frequently reported clinical symptoms amongst individuals who tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection by rt-PCR. Only five factors, fever/history of fever, cough, working/living in an area reporting local transmission, gender and headache (ranked according to predictive power), were found to be statistically significant. Fever/history of fever alone had a specificity of 79.2% and it gradually increased to 99.9% in combination with runny nose, cough, male gender and age ≥ 50.ConclusionsThe study identified predictive ability of factors in diagnosing COVID-19, individually and in combination. It proposes a scoring system for use in publicly funded primary care settings in Qatar without an rt-PCR test, thus enabling early isolation and treatment where necessary. Further similar studies are needed as newer variations of SARS-CoV2 are continuously emerging to ensure its accuracy.
| S-EPMC8979608 | biostudies-literature