Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to Implementation of a Decision Support Tool for Adolescent Depression and Suicidality Screening: A Qualitative Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Radovic ◽  
Nathan Anderson ◽  
Megan Hamm ◽  
Brandie George-Milford ◽  
Carrie Fascetti ◽  
...  

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.

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachelle Ashcroft ◽  
Catherine Donnelly ◽  
Maya Dancey ◽  
Sandeep Gill ◽  
Simon Lam ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Integrated primary care teams are ideally positioned to support the mental health care needs arising during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding how COVID-19 has affected mental health care delivery within primary care settings will be critical to inform future policy and practice decisions during the later phases of the pandemic and beyond. The objective of our study was to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care teams’ delivery of mental health care. Methods A qualitative study using focus groups conducted with primary care teams in Ontario, Canada. Focus group data was analysed using thematic analysis. Results We conducted 11 focus groups with 10 primary care teams and a total of 48 participants. With respect to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health care in primary care teams, we identified three key themes: i) the high demand for mental health care, ii) the rapid transformation to virtual care, and iii) the impact on providers. Conclusions From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, primary care quickly responded to the rising mental health care demands of their patients. Despite the numerous challenges they faced with the rapid transition to virtual care, primary care teams have persevered. It is essential that policy and decision-makers take note of the toll that these demands have placed on providers. There is an immediate need to enhance primary care’s capacity for mental health care for the duration of the pandemic and beyond.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-322
Author(s):  
Tracey L. Henry ◽  
Stacie Schmidt ◽  
Maha B. Lund ◽  
Tamara Haynes ◽  
Darby Ford ◽  
...  

Screening for depression is paramount to identify patients with depression and link them to care, yet only 29% of patients in the primary care center (PCC) were screened for depression in 2016. A baseline survey identified provider barriers to depression screening, including lack of time, support staff, and referral resources. The purpose of this project was to increase depression screening in the PCC using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2/9). The authors created an educational program for staff and providers that included referral resources, treatment guidelines, and a decision-support tool in the electronic medical record. A retrospective chart review was performed, from January 2016 to June 2017, to determine the percentage of patients who received annual depression screening. During the program, the PCC saw an increase in depression screening rates. Thus, it is possible to overcome barriers to depression screening in a primary care setting by providing resources and education to clinicians.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne M. Gillespie ◽  
Chelsea Manheim ◽  
Carrie Gilman ◽  
Jurgis Karuza ◽  
Tobie H. Olsan ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp19X703505
Author(s):  
Joseph Clark ◽  
Elvis Amoakwa ◽  
John Blenkinsopp ◽  
Florence Reedy ◽  
Miriam Johnson

BackgroundResearch to identify the role of primary care in cancer care is important. However, trials in primary care are difficult.AimTo understand how patients, families, and primary care clinicians view their role in cancer care and identify opportunities for cancer primary care research.MethodQualitative study embedded within a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of a primary care based needs assessment intervention. The Supportive Cancer Needs Survey (SCNS) was the main outcome. In-depth interviews with patients/carers and focus groups with primary care staff explored views on cancer care and trial participation. Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically by three independent researchers.ResultsFifteen cancer patients and three carers were interviewed and four focus groups (n = 11) were conducted. Three themes were generated satisfaction with current care; key time-points for improved cancer care; and information and research. Satisfaction with current care among patients was high in spite of 72% reporting at least one moderate-high unmet need at baseline. Most patients undergoing cancer treatment were unsure when to access primary care. Patients and carers highly valued proactive contact from their practice following diagnosis though this was uncommon. Post-oncology discharge was a key time-point for information needs and support for patients. Patients were reluctant to consider palliative care in spite of palliative care needs. Some felt therapeutic benefit from completing study measures.ConclusionPatients are satisfied with cancer primary care despite unmet needs. Palliative care is poorly understood by many who may benefit. Research participation may benefit some patients.


2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-120
Author(s):  
Nina Tamminen ◽  
Pia Solin ◽  
Eija Stengård ◽  
Lasse Kannas ◽  
Tarja Kettunen

Aims: In this study, we aimed to investigate what competencies are needed for mental health promotion in health sector practice in Finland. Methods: A qualitative study was carried out to seek the views of mental health professionals regarding mental health promotion-related competencies. The data were collected via two focus groups and a questionnaire survey of professionals working in the health sector in Finland. The focus groups consisted of a total of 13 professionals. Further, 20 questionnaires were received from the questionnaire survey. The data were analysed using the qualitative data analysis software ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin. A content analysis was carried out. Results: In total, 23 competencies were identified and clustered under the categories of theoretical knowledge, practical skills, and personal attitudes and values. In order to promote mental health, it is necessary to have a knowledge of the principles and concepts of mental health promotion, including methods and tools for effective practices. Furthermore, a variety of skills-based competencies such as communication and collaboration skills were described. Personal attitudes and values included a holistic approach and respect for human rights, among others. Conclusions: The study provides new information on what competencies are needed to plan, implement and evaluate mental health promotion in health sector practice, with the aim of contributing to a more effective workforce. The competencies provide aid in planning training programmes and qualifications, as well as job descriptions and roles in health sector workplaces related to mental health promotion.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 901-906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M Toy ◽  
Adam Drechsler ◽  
Richard C Waters

Abstract Objective Translating clinical evidence to daily practice remains a challenge and may improve with clinical pathways. We assessed interest in and usability of clinical pathways by primary care professionals. Methods An online survey was created. Interest in pathways for patient care and learning was assessed at start and finish. Participants completed baseline questions then pathway-associated question sets related to management of 2 chronic diseases. Perceived pathway usability was assessed using the system usability scale. Accuracy and confidence of answers was compared for baseline and pathway-assisted questions. Results Of 115 participants, 17.4% had used clinical pathways, the lowest of decision support tool types surveyed. Accuracy and confidence in answers significantly improved for all pathways. Interest in using pathways daily or weekly was above 75% for the respondents. Conclusion There is low utilization of, but high interest in, clinical pathways by primary care clinicians. Pathways improve accuracy and confidence in answering written clinical questions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document