Health plan requirements for mental health and substance use screening in primary care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Horgan CM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2219728 | biostudies-other | 2007 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSubstance use disorders, depression and anxiety disproportionately affect people with HIV (PWH) and lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Routine screening can help address these problems but is underutilized. This study sought to describe patient and provider perspectives on the acceptability and usefulness of systematic electronic, self-administered screening for tobacco, alcohol, other substance use, and mental health symptoms among patients in HIV primary care.MethodsScreening used validated instruments delivered pre-appointment by both secure messaging and clinic-based tablets, with results integrated into the electronic health record (EHR). Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 9 HIV primary care providers and 12 patients in the 3 largest HIV primary care clinics in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health system who participated in a clinical trial evaluating computerized screening and behavioral interventions was conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. A thematic approach was utilized for coding and analysis of interview data using a combination of deductive and inductive methods.ResultsFour key themes were identified: (1) perceived clinical benefit of systematic, electronic screening and EHR integration for providers and patients; (2) usefulness of having multiple methods of questionnaire completion; (3) importance of the patient-provider relationship to facilitate completion and accurate reporting; and (4) barriers, include privacy and confidentiality concerns about reporting sensitive information, particularly about substance use, and potential burden from repeated screenings.ConclusionsFindings suggest that electronic, self-administered substance use and mental health screening is acceptable to patients and may have clinical utility to providers. While offering different methods of screening completion can capture a wider range of patients, a strong patient-provider relationship is a key factor in overcoming barriers and ensuring accurate patient responses. Further investigation into facilitators, barriers, and utility of electronic screening for PWH and other high-priority patient populations is indicated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03217058. Registered 13 July 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03217058.
| S-EPMC8827178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMental health and substance use disorders disproportionately affect people with HIV (PWH), and may have been exacerbated during COVID-19. The Promoting Access to Care Engagement (PACE) trial was designed to assess the effectiveness of electronic screening for mental health and substance use in HIV primary care and enrolled PWH from October 2018 to July 2020. Our objective here was to compare screening rates and results for PWH before (October 2018 - February 2020) and early in the COVID-19 pandemic (March-July 2020).MethodsAdult (≥ 18 years) PWH from 3 large HIV primary care clinics in a US-based integrated healthcare system were offered electronic screening online or via in-clinic tablet computer every 6 months. Screening completion and results (for depression, suicidal ideation, anxiety, and substance use) were analyzed using logistic regression with generalized estimating equations to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) before and after the start of the regional COVID-19 shelter-in-place orders on March 17, 2020. Models adjusted for demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity), HIV risk factors (men who have sex with men, injection drug use, heterosexual, other), medical center, and modality of screening completion (online or tablet). We conducted qualitative interviews with providers participating in the intervention to evaluate how the pandemic impacted patient care.ResultsOf 8,954 eligible visits, 3,904 completed screenings (420 during COVID, 3,484 pre-COVID), with lower overall completion rates during COVID (38% vs. 44%). Patients completing screening during COVID were more likely to be White (63% vs. 55%), male (94% vs. 90%), and MSM (80% vs., 75%). Adjusted PRs comparing COVID and pre-COVID (reference) were 0.70 (95% CI), 0.92 (95% CI), and 0.54 (95% CI) for tobacco use, any substance use, and suicidal ideation, respectively. No significant differences were found by era for depression, anxiety, alcohol, or cannabis use. These results were in contrast to provider-reported impressions of increases in substance use and mental health symptoms.ConclusionFindings suggest PWH had modest declines in screening rates early in the COVID-19 pandemic which may have been affected by the shift to telemedicine. There was no evidence that mental health problems and substance use increased for PWH in primary care.Trial registrationNCT03217058 (First registration date: 7/13/2017); https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03217058.
| S-EPMC10186313 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver 75% of people with mental neurological and substance use disorders (MNSD) live in low and middle-income countries with limited access to specialized care. The World Health Organization's Mental Health Gap Action Program (mhGAP) aims to address the human resource gap but it requires contextualization.AimsWe conducted a qualitative study in rural coastal Kenya to explore the local terms, perceived causes and management modalities of priority MNSD listed in the mhGAP, to inform implementation in this setting.MethodsWe conducted 8 focus group discussions with primary health care providers and traditional health practitioners and used the framework method to conduct thematic analysis. We identified local terms, perceived causes and treatment options for MNSD. We also explored possibilities for collaboration between the traditional health practitioners and primary health care providers.ResultsWe found local terms for depression, psychoses, epilepsy, disorders due to substance use and self-harm/ suicide but none for dementia. Child and adolescent mental and behavioral problems were not regarded as MNSD but consequences of poor parenting. Self-harm/suicide was recognized in the context of other MNSD. Causes of MNSD were broadly either biological or supernatural. Treatment options were dependent on perceived cause of illness. Most traditional health practitioners were willing to collaborate with primary health care providers mainly through referring cases. Primary health care providers were unwilling to collaborate with traditional health practitioners because they perceived them to contribute to worsening of patients' prognoses.ConclusionsLocal terms and management modalities are available for some priority MNSD in this setting. Community level case detection and referral may be hindered by lack of collaboration between traditional health practitioners and primary health care providers. There is need for training on the recognition and management of all priority MNSD.
| S-EPMC6650073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdolescents often present at primary care clinics with nonspecific physical symptoms when, in fact, they have at least 1 mental health or risk behavior (psychosocial) issue with which they would like help but do not disclose to their care provider. Despite global recommendations, over 50% of youths are not screened for mental health and risk behavior issues in primary care.ObjectiveThis review aimed to examine the implementation, acceptability, feasibility, benefits, and barriers of e-screening tools for mental health and risk behaviors among youth in primary care settings.MethodsElectronic databases-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews-were searched for studies on the routine screening of youth in primary care settings. Screening tools needed to be electronic and screen for at least 1 mental health or risk behavior issue. A total of 11 studies that were reported in 12 articles, of which all were from high-income countries, were reviewed.Resultse-Screening was largely proven to be feasible and acceptable to youth and their primary care providers. Preconsultation e-screening facilitated discussions about sensitive issues and increased disclosure by youth. However, barriers such as the lack of time, training, and discomfort in raising sensitive issues with youth continued to be reported.ConclusionsTo implement e-screening, clinicians need to change their behaviors, and e-screening processes must become normalized into their workflows. Co-designing and tailoring screening implementation frameworks to meet the needs of specific contexts may be required to ensure that clinicians overcome initial resistances and perceived barriers and adopt the required processes in their work.
| S-EPMC8663603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Most individuals with substance use disorders and with mental disorders do not receive treatment. If treatment options were more attractive, treatment rates might increase. The advantages of novel approaches, including primary care-based treatment and collaborative care in a primary care setting, have been documented. However, less is known about consumers' valuation of these options. The authors assessed monetary valuation of these treatment types compared with usual care in a specialty treatment setting. Contingent valuation methods were used in a Web-based randomized vignette experiment that involved 2,146 individuals who screened positive for a drug or alcohol use disorder or a mental disorder. Participants valued a primary care-based treatment visit over usual care in a specialty treatment setting by $9.00 and a collaborative care visit over usual care in a specialty treatment setting by $5.85.
| S-EPMC4523443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Universal mental health screening in pediatric primary care is recommended, but studies report slow uptake and low rates of patient follow-through after referral to specialized services. This review examined possible explanations related to the process of screening, focusing on how parents and youth are engaged, and how providers evaluate and use screening results.A narrative synthesis was developed after a systematic review of 3 databases (plus follow-up of citations, expert recommendations, and checks for multiple publications about the same study). Searching identified 1,188 titles, and of these, 186 full-text articles were reviewed. Two authors extracted data from 45 articles meeting inclusion criteria.Published studies report few details about how mental health screens were administered, including how clinicians explain their purpose or confidentiality, or whether help was provided for language, literacy, or disability problems. Although they were not addressed directly in the studies reviewed, uptake and detection rates appeared to vary with means of administration. Screening framed as universal, confidential, and intended to optimize attention to patient concerns increased acceptability. Studies said little about how providers were taught to explore screen results. Screening increased referrals, but many still followed negative screens, in some cases because of parent concerns apparently not reflected by screen results but possibly stemming from screen-prompted discussions.Little research has addressed the process of engaging patients in mental health screening in pediatric primary care or how clinicians can best use screening results. The literature does offer suggestions for better clinical practice and research that may lead to improvements in uptake and outcome.
| S-EPMC3942871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSubstance use, a leading cause of illness and death, is underidentified in medical practice.ObjectiveThe Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription medication, and other Substance use (TAPS) tool was developed to address the need for a brief screening and assessment instrument that includes all commonly used substances and fits into clinical workflows. The goal of this study was to assess the performance of the TAPS tool in primary care patients.DesignMultisite study, conducted within the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network, comparing the TAPS tool with a reference standard measure. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02110693).Setting5 adult primary care clinics.Participants2000 adult patients consecutively recruited from clinic waiting areas.MeasurementsInterviewer- and self-administered versions of the TAPS tool were compared with a reference standard, the modified World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), which measures problem use and substance use disorder (SUD).ResultsInterviewer- and self-administered versions of the TAPS tool had similar diagnostic characteristics. For identifying problem use (at a cutoff of 1+), the TAPS tool had a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90 to 0.95) and specificity of 0.87 (CI, 0.85 to 0.89) for tobacco and a sensitivity of 0.74 (CI, 0.70 to 0.78) and specificity of 0.79 (CI, 0.76 to 0.81) for alcohol. For problem use of illicit and prescription drugs, sensitivity ranged from 0.82 (CI, 0.76 to 0.87) for marijuana to 0.63 (CI, 0.47 to 0.78) for sedatives; specificity was 0.93 or higher. For identifying any SUD (at a cutoff of 2+), sensitivity was lower.LimitationsThe low prevalence of some drug classes led to poor precision in some estimates. Research assistants were not blinded to participants' TAPS tool responses when they administered the CIDI.ConclusionIn a diverse population of adult primary care patients, the TAPS tool detected clinically relevant problem substance use. Although it also may detect tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use disorders, further refinement is needed before it can be recommended broadly for SUD screening.Primary funding sourceNational Institute on Drug Abuse.
| S-EPMC5291717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Individuals with mental health and substance use problems have higher rates of smoking and tobacco-related morbidity and mortality than the general population. These increased rates can be explained, in part, by lower cessation rates compared with overall declines in tobacco use in recent years. The purpose of this study was to examine tobacco screening and cessation counseling in healthcare settings to compare rates for adults with mental health and substance use problems with those without such problems. METHODS:A nationally representative sample of adult smokers (N=42,534) from the 2013 to 2016 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health was analyzed using logistic regression to estimate ORs for screening and counseling, adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, past-month smoking frequency, and past-year receipt of mental health and substance use treatment. Additionally, predicted probabilities of screening and counseling were calculated across groups to compare regression-adjusted rates of each service. Analyses were conducted in 2017. RESULTS:Compared with smokers without mental health or substance use problems, smokers with mental health and substance use problems and smokers with only mental health problems had higher odds of screening and counseling (all p<0.001); however, smokers with only substance use problems did not (screening p=0.91, counseling p=0.45). CONCLUSIONS:Like smokers with mental health problems, smokers with only substance use problems are at increased risk of tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. Yet, unlike smokers with mental health problems, their rates of tobacco screening and cessation counseling by general medical providers do not reflect this elevated risk.
| S-EPMC6363105 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-reported substance use is more likely to be influenced by underreporting bias compared to the biological markers. Underreporting bias or validity of self-reported substance use depends on the study population and cannot be generalized to the entire population. This study aimed to compare the validity of self-reported substance use between research setting and primary health care setting from the same source population.Methods and materialsThe population in this study included from Rafsanjan Youth Cohort Study (RYCS) and from primary care health centers. The sample from RYCS is made up 607 participants, 113 (18.62%) women and 494 (81.38%) men and sample from PHC centers is made up 522 individuals including 252 (48.28%) women and 270 (51.72%) men. We compared two groups in respect of prevalence estimates based on self-reported substance use and urine test. Then for evaluating validity of self-reported substance use in both group, the results of reference standard, urine tests, were compared with the results of self-reported drug use using measures of concordance.ResultsThe prevalence of substance use based on urine test was significantly higher in both settings compared to self-reported substance use over the past 72 h. The sensitivity of self-report substance use over the past 72 h in research setting was 39.4, 20, 10% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively and in primary health care setting was 50, 20.7, 12.5% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively. The level of agreement between self-reported substance use over the past 72 h and urine test indicated fair and moderate agreement for opium in both research and primary health care settings, respectively and also slight agreement for methadone and cannabis in both settings were reported. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of self-reported substance use. For all substances, the level of agreement increased with longer recall periods. The specificity of self-report for all substances in both groups was more than 99%.ConclusionIndividuals in primary health care setting were more likely to self-reported substance use than in research setting, but setting did not have a statistically significant effect in terms of self-reported substance use. Programs that rely on self-reported substance use may not estimate the exact prevalence of substance use in both research and primary health care settings, especially for substances that have a higher social stigma. Therefore, it is recommended that self-report and biological indicators be used for more accurate evaluation in substance use studies. It is also suggested that future epidemiological studies be performed to reduce bias of social desirability and find a method providing the highest level of privacy.
| S-EPMC8439053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The world is undergoing a rapid health transition, with an ageing population and disease burden increasingly defined by disability. In Sub-Saharan Africa the next 40 years are predicted to see reduced mortality, signalling a surge in the impact of chronic diseases. We modelled these epidemiological changes and associated mental health workforce requirements. Years lived with a disability (YLD) predictions for mental and substance use disorders for each decade from 2010 to 2050 for four Sub-Saharan African regions were calculated using Global Burden of Disease 2010 study (GBD 2010) data and UN population forecasts. Predicted mental health workforce requirements for 2010 and 2050, by region and for selected countries, were modelled using GBD 2010 prevalence estimates and recommended packages of care and staffing ratios for low- and middle-income countries, and compared to current staffing from the WHO Mental Health Atlas. Significant population growth and ageing will result in an estimated 130% increase in the burden of mental and substance use disorders in Sub-Saharan Africa by 2050, to 45 million YLDs. As a result, the required mental health workforce will increase by 216,600 full time equivalent staff from 2010 to 2050, and far more compared to the existing workforce. The growth in mental and substance use disorders by 2050 is likely to significantly affect health and productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa. To reduce this burden, packages of care for key mental disorders should be provided through increasing the mental health workforce towards targets outlined in this paper. This requires a shift from current practice in most African countries, involving substantial investment in the training of primary care practitioners, supported by district based mental health specialist teams using a task sharing model that mobilises local community resources, with the expansion of inpatient psychiatric units based in district and regional general hospitals.
| S-EPMC4195720 | biostudies-literature