A qualitative study exploring the application of psychosocial screening to identify psychological conditions in non-surgical aesthetic patients

This study explores medical aesthetic practitioners' initial and ongoing application of psychosocial screening, to identify existing or emerging psychological disorders or conditions in non-surgical aesthetic patients. The increased demand for non-surgical aesthetic treatments correlates with the rise of patients who present with existing or evolving psychosocial problems or issues. Therefore, patients must be appropriately and adequately assessed, to identify those vulnerable individuals who are not suitable for treatment or whose treatments may exacerbate underlying psychological conditions. Identification can support signposting to trained professionals to ensure appropriate holistic care. Moreover, the study explores which validated screening tools have been adopted into practice, and routes for guiding patients should concerns arise.

Validity of a Multidimensional Psychosocial Screener Based on the ESC Cardiovascular Prevention Guidelines – Evidence from the General and Cardiovascular Patient Population

Aim. To evaluate the psychometric properties and validity of the updated version of the Dutch multidimensional European Society of Cardiology (ESC) psychosocial screening instrument in patients with heart disease and the general population. Method. 678 participants (Mage = 48.2, SD = 16.8; 46% male) of the Dutch general population and 312 cardiac patients (Mage = 65.9, SD = 9.9; 77% male) who recently received percutaneous coronary intervention completed the ESC Psychosocial screening instrument and validated questionnaires for depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), Type D personality (DS14), hostility (CMHS), anger (STAS-T), trauma (SRIP), and chronic work and family stress (ERI, MMQ-6). Results. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed that the eight screened risk factors were best measured as separate entities, rather than as broader indications of distress. Inter-instrument agreement, assessed with the intraclass coefficient (ICC) and the screening accuracy indicators (receiving operator characteristic [ROC] curves, sensitivity, specificity, and the positive and negative predictive values [PPV;NPV]) were good for most screened risk factors. PPV was low in low prevalence risk factors like anxiety and trauma. Conclusion. Overall, the current version of the ESC Psychosocial screening instrument has an acceptable performance in both populations, with a fair to excellent level of agreement with established full questionnaires. Besides a few suggestions for further refinement, the screener may be implemented in primary care and cardiological practice.

The Validity and Reliability of the Chula COVID-19 Psychosocial Home Isolation Evaluation Tool (CCPHIET)

Background: The cumulative number of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant shortage of hospital beds. Many patients may not require hospitalization and can be clinically observed in home settings. However, some psychosocial factors are correlated with unsuccessful home isolation (HI), which might negatively affect the transmission control in the community. Therefore, we developed a new psychosocial screening tool (CCPHIET) for assessing HI suitability and examined its validity and reliability.Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study included COVID-19 patients who were deemed to be medically safe for 14 days of HI. The CCPHIET is comprised of 8 clinical domains pertinent to HI behavioral compliance and risk. We explored its statistical validity and reliability and discussed the potential utility of this tool. Results: A total of 65 COVID-19 patients participated in this study. Most patients (58.5%) were evaluated as good candidates for HI. The CCPHIET has an acceptable content validity (IOC index > 0.5), moderate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.611) and substantial to excellent inter-rater reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.944, Cohen’s kappa= 0.627).Conclusions: To compromise between strict and costly absolute institutional quarantine and the potentially unsuccessful absolute HI, the CCPHIET may help to identify good candidates for HI in mild and asymptomatic COVID-19 patients. This psychosocial information would support the physicians in matching each patient to the most suitable setting. Therefore, safe medical care is provided, unnecessary use of medical resources is spared, and local transmission is contained.

49 Exploring parental acceptability of universal psychosocial screening in the pediatric emergency department

Primary Subject area Mental Health Background Mental health concerns among children and adolescents presenting to the emergency department (ED) are on the rise. Universal screening can facilitate early identification and management of these concerns, mitigating significant long-term morbidity and mortality. The efficacy of psychosocial screening in the ED is not only determined by accurate identification of concerns, but by downstream resource-seeking behaviours to address these concerns. For many children and adolescents, parents hold a key role in determining their access to care. Thus, parental attitudes and perceptions of psychosocial screening may influence resource-seeking behaviours and predict a youth’s ability to access support. Objectives Given the limited understanding of parental perceptions of psychosocial screening in the ED, we aimed to qualitatively explore parents’ attitudes towards screening with MyHEARTSMAP, an electronic self/proxy administered psychosocial screening tool. We also quantified resource-seeking behaviours and explored barriers to seeking care. Design/Methods This was a nested qualitative study conducted during the 30-day follow-up period of a larger prospective cohort study. Eligible youth and their accompanying parent/guardian completed a self/proxy psychosocial screen using MyHEARTSMAP. Youth who screened positive were provided with recommendations and resources for support. 30 days (+ 5 days) after their ED visit, parents participated in semi-structured follow-up interviews to share their attitudes, perceptions, and thoughts around the screening and care-seeking process. Results Of the 171 participants requiring resources for support, 124 (72.5%; 95% CI 65.2-79.1%) completed the follow-up interview. Most parents endorsed positive perceptions of the screening process, describing it as an “eye-opening” process that “sparked conversation”.74.2% (95% CI 65.6-81.6%) of participants also agreed with the support recommendations they received during their ED visit. In terms of resource seeking, as displayed in Figure 1, only 41 participants (33.1%; 95% CI 24.9-42.1%) attempted to access support services. Other families felt identified concerns were mild and “not serious enough” to warrant resources, though many expressed an intention to seek care if the concerns escalated. Conclusion Parental perceptions of psychosocial screening in the ED were favourable and encouraging, with a majority of participants expressing an understanding and appreciation of the process. This lends support to the implementation of universal psychosocial screening in the ED. Despite positive attitudes towards screening, only a fraction actually attempted to access care. This incongruence may reflect the persisting view that mental health holds low priority and suggests a need for increased education on the importance of seeking timely mental health care.

Protocol for mapping psychosocial screening to resources in pediatric oncology: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background A pediatric cancer diagnosis and its treatment can have a detrimental effect on the mental health of children and their families. Screening to identify psychosocial risk in families has been recognized as a standard of care in pediatric oncology, but there has been limited clinical application of this standard thus far. A significant impediment to the implementation of psychosocial screening is the dearth of information on how to translate psychosocial screening to clinical practice, and specifically, how to follow-up from screening results. This manuscript aims to describe a protocol of a new intervention examining the feasibility and acceptability of mapping via a Psychosocial Navigator (PSN) psychosocial screening results to specific recommendations of resources for families based on measured risk for psychosocial distress and mental health symptoms. Methods The pilot randomized control trial (RCT) consists of dyads of youth (10–17 years) newly diagnosed with cancer and their primary caregiver. This RCT includes two arms (intervention and control group), with each group completing measurements near diagnosis and 1 year later. After the initial assessment, dyads in the intervention group receive monthly screening results and recommendations from the study PSN that are tailored to these results. The patient’s primary healthcare team (nurse, social worker, oncologist) also receive the risk, distress, and mental health results as well as the recommendations from the PSN. Discussion This study addresses a significant barrier to the implementation of psychosocial screening in pediatric oncology: specifically, the limited knowledge of how to follow-up from screening results. Findings from this pilot will inform a future definitive RCT to test the effectiveness of the intervention on patient and family mental health outcomes. This project has implications for enhancing clinical care in pediatric oncology, as well as other pediatric populations. Strengths and limitations of this study This is the first study of screening and follow-up using a psychosocial navigator. This study involves both patient and caregiver report. The small sample size necessitates a future larger study to investigate the effects of intervention. Trial registration NCT04132856, Registered 10 October 2019—retrospectively registered.

Using qualitative and participatory methods to refine implementation strategies: universal family psychosocial screening in pediatric cancer

Background Children with cancer and their families are at risk for short- and long-term psychosocial difficulties. Screening for psychosocial risk remains inconsistent, leading to inequitable access to psychosocial services. The Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT) is an evidence-based caregiver report screener of family psychosocial risk ready for implementation in a nationwide cluster randomized trial that will test two implementation strategies across 18 pediatric cancer centers. The current study, conducted in preparation for the trial, solicited the perspectives of key stakeholders about two proposed implementation strategies identified during previous research which focus on health equity and screening of all families (universal screening). Results were used to refine the implementation strategies for testing in the subsequent trial. Methods Semi-structured interviews with 19 key stakeholders (parents, health care providers, pediatric oncology organizations, and pediatric healthcare leaders) were conducted regarding the two implementation strategies. Strategy I is a training webinar; Strategy II is training + implementation enhanced resources, which includes a champion at each site and monthly peer support consultation calls. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis with deductively derived codes based on the Interactive Systems Framework and inductive codes based on emerging data. Results Stakeholder interviews provided rich data to rigorously modify the proposed implementation strategies. Implementation strategies were modified in consistent with these recommendations: engaging providers by framing family psychosocial screening as an opportunity for more efficient and effective practice; setting clear expectations about the importance of screening 100% of children and their families to achieve the goal of universal screening, equity of care, and reduction of disparities; and adapting successful strategies for systematic implementation of screening to ensure optimal engagement with children and their families throughout their care. Conclusions Stakeholder input strengthened implementation strategies by suggesting modifications that emphasized health equity and reduction in health disparities. Using implementation science methods to build on a long-standing program of research provided practical insights about immediate needs of families and historical insights regarding structural inequities such as language differences and access to services. Resulting strategies address all levels of the social ecology for children’s cancer care, including the patient, family, provider, healthcare system, and community. Trial registration NCT04446728 June 23, 2020