BACKGROUND
Screening Wizard (SW) is a technology-based decision support tool aimed at guiding primary care providers (PCPs) to respond to depression and suicidality screens in adolescents. Separate screens assess adolescents’ and parents’ reports on mental health symptoms, treatment preferences, and potential treatment barriers. A detailed summary is provided to PCPs, also identifying adolescent-parent discrepancies. The goal of SW is to enhance decision making to increase utilization of evidence-based treatments.
OBJECTIVE
We describe a multi-stakeholder qualitative study with adolescents, parents, and providers to understand potential barriers to implementation of SW.
METHODS
We interviewed 11 parents and 11 adolescents, and conducted 2 focus groups with 17 healthcare providers (PCPs, nurses, therapists, staff) across 2 pediatric practices. Participants described previous experiences with screening for depression and were shown a mock-up of SW and asked for feedback. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim, and codebooks inductively developed based on content. Transcripts were double-coded, and disagreements adjudicated to full agreement. Completed coding was used to produce thematic analyses of interviews and focus groups.
RESULTS
We identified five main themes across the interviews and focus groups: (1) parents, adolescents, and pediatric PCPs agree that depression screening should occur in pediatric primary care; (2) there is concern that accurate self-disclosure does not always occur during depression screening; (3) Screening Wizard is viewed as a tool that could facilitate depression screening, and which might encourage more honesty in screening responses; (4) parents, adolescents and providers do not want Screening Wizard to replace mental health discussions with providers; and (5) providers want to maintain autonomy in treatment decisions.
CONCLUSIONS
We identified that providers, parents, and adolescents all have concerns with current screening practices, mainly regarding inaccurate self-disclosure. They recognized value in SW as a computerized tool that may elicit more honest responses and identify adolescent-parent discrepancies. Surprisingly, providers did not want the SW report to include treatment recommendations, and all groups did not want the SW report to replace conversations with the PCP about depression. While SW was originally developed as a treatment decision algorithm, this qualitative study has led us to remove this component, and instead focus on aspects identified as most useful by all groups. We hope that this initial qualitative work will improve future implementation of SW.
Personality disorder co‐morbidity in primary care ‘Improving Access to Psychological Therapy’ services: A qualitative study exploring professionals' perspectives of working with this patient group
