Screening In Primary Care Research Articles

Community-Based Nutrition Risk Screening in Older Adults (COMRISK): An Exploration of the Experience of Being Screened and Prevalence of Nutrition Risk in Alberta, Canada

Abstract The objectives of this feasibility study were to measure the prevalence of nutrition risk in community-dwelling older adults (CDOA, ages ≥ 65 years) and explore the perspectives of CDOA of the acceptability, value, and effectiveness of nutrition risk screening in primary care and community settings. Using the Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN)© eight-item tool (n = 276), results indicated that moderate and high nutrition risks affected 50 per cent and 8 per cent, respectively, of those screened. Interviewees (n = 16) agreed that screening is acceptable, important, and valuable (Theme One). Effectiveness was unclear, as only 3 of 16 respondents recalled being told their nutrition risk status. When articulating nutrition-related issues, a food security theme, expressed in the third person, was prominent (Theme Two). Screening for nutrition risk and receiving nutrition information in community-based settings are acceptable to CDOA and medically necessary, as evidenced by the high proportion of CDOA at moderate-high nutrition risk.

Adolescent behavioural risk screening in primary care: physician's point of view.

Despite regular consultation between adolescents/young adults (AYA) and their physicians, they are not regularly screened for psychosocial risk behaviours. This study examines physicians' self-reported psychosocial risk behaviour screening in AYA. It aims to highlight which elements hinder or improve screening abilities. The design was a cross-sectional quantitative survey. Data were obtained through a self-reported questionnaire sent out to primary care physicians (PCP) in Switzerland in 2018. The target population consisted of 1,824 PCP (29% response rate). Participants were asked whether they screened youths from 3 age groups [10-14 y/o, 15-20 y/o, and 21-25y/o] for the HEEADSSS items during child well visits and routine checkups. Barriers to screening included primary consultation motive prioritization, insufficient time, patient compliance, reimbursement, lack of skills related to adolescent health, lack of referral options. Data were analysed first through a bivariate analysis using Chi-square tests then through a multinomial logistic regression. The majority of physicians partook in preventive screening for 3-5 psychosocial risk elements. They reported the primary consultation motive as well as a lack of available time as having a high impact on their screening habits. Physician's experience and having discussed confidentiality were related to an increase in the number of topics addressed. Confidentiality remained a significant variable throughout all analyses. Barriers such as lack of consultation time and prioritization issues were found by physicians to be critical but did not hinder screening habits. The main element impacting screening habits was assuring confidentiality and the second is self-efficacy.

Engaging primary care clinicians in the selection of implementation strategies for toddler social-emotional health promotion in community health centers.

Social-emotional risk for subsequent behavioral health problems can be identified at toddler age, a period where prevention has a heightened impact. This study aimed to meaningfully engage pediatric clinicians, given the emphasis on health promotion and broad reach of primary care, to prepare an Implementation Research Logic Model to guide the implementation of a screening and referral process for toddlers with elevated social-emotional risk. Using an adaptation of a previously published community partner engagement method, six pediatricians from community health centers (CHCs) comprised a Clinical Partner Work Group. The group was engaged in identifying determinants (barriers/facilitators), selecting and specifying strategies, strategy-determinant matching, a modified Delphi approach for strategy prioritization, and user-centered design methods. The data gathered from individual interviews, two group sessions, and a follow-up survey resulted in a completed Implementation Research Logic Model. The Clinical Partner Work Group identified 16 determinants, including barriers (e.g., patient access to electronic devices) and facilitators (e.g., clinician buy-in). They then selected and specified 14 strategies, which were prioritized based on ratings of feasibility, effectiveness, and priority. The highest-rated strategies (e.g., integration of the screener into the electronic health record) provided coverage of all identified barriers and comprised the primary implementation strategy "package" to be used and tested. Clinical partners provided important context and insights for implementation strategy selection and specification to support the implementation of social-emotional risk screening and referral in pediatric primary care. The methodology described herein can improve partner engagement in implementation efforts and increase the likelihood of success. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Addressing health equity in pediatric surgical care in the United States– Progress and challenges

There are notable inequities in health outcomes for children based on their social determinants of health (SDOH), including where they are born and live, their primary language, their race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and more. These health inequities are not restricted to resource limited settings; here we highlight three broad topics that are relevant to pediatric surgeons in the United States (US): access to care and disparities, and examples of inequities in firearm-related injuries and appendicitis.Most of our patients will at some point require operative interventions, yet there can be significant challenges in accessing this care and navigating our health systems, particularly around complex perioperative care. There are significant opportunities to improve equitable care by helping patients navigate our health systems and connecting them with additional resources, including screening for primary care services.Firearm-related injuries are now the leading cause of death in children in the US, with significant associated morbidity for non-fatal injuries. There are notable inequities in the risk of injury and types of injuries experienced by children based on their SDOH. Appendicitis is one of the most common pathologies managed by pediatric surgeons, with similar inequities in the rates of perforated appendicitis based on a child's SDOH.For both issues, addressing the inequities our patients experience requires moving upstream and working towards prevention. Key opportunities include better research and data to understand the drivers for observed inequities, multidisciplinary collaboration, community engagement, and public health advocacy among others. As a profession, we have a responsibility to work to address the health inequities our patients experience.

Abstract 11930: Using Implementation Science to Develop a Familial Hypercholesterolemia Screening Program in Primary Care: The CARE-FH Study

Introduction: Cholesterol screening in primary care is necessary to identify children and young adults with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Research question: What is the current state of FH screening and what barriers exist to screening? What implementation strategies informed by human centered design can be utilized to improve FH screening in primary care? Aim: We partnered with key stakeholders to sequentially define the current state of FH screening, assess acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of implementing an FH screening program, and select clinically usable strategies to be deployed as a package in the CARE-FH clinical trial. Methods: Data on the perspectives of primary care clinicians to implement an FH screening program were collected. Methods informed by implementation science and human centered design for data collections included: contextual inquiries, surveys, and deliberative engagement sessions. Results: Current screening for FH occurred rarely, and then only after a cardiovascular event or sometimes in primary care due to a family history of high cholesterol or early heart attack. Surveys of primary care clinicians suggested FH screening in primary care was acceptable, appropriate, and feasible. Reported and observed barriers and facilitators to screening identified where improvement in FH screening and diagnosis could occur. Data from the current state and perspectives on FH screening were used to identify multilevel implementation strategies that were presented to and modified by clinician and healthcare stakeholders. This package of strategies was pilot tested in one primary care clinic and further refined to a final implementation strategy package to be tested in a geographical cluster randomized stepped wedge trial. Conclusion: We created an implementation strategy package to be deployed and evaluated in the CARE-FH clinical trial to improve FH awareness, identification, and initiate guideline-based care.

Multi-infection screening for migrant patients in UK primary care: Challenges and opportunities

BackgroundMigrants in Europe face a disproportionate burden of undiagnosed infection, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections and many belong to an under-immunised group. The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has called for innovative strategies to deliver integrated multi-disease screening to migrants within primary care, yet this is poorly implemented in the UK. We did an in-depth qualitative study to understand current practice, barriers and solutions to infectious disease screening in primary care, and to seek feedback on a collaboratively developed digitalised integrated clinical decision-making tool called Health Catch UP!, which supports multi-infection screening for migrant patients. MethodsTwo-phase qualitative study of UK primary healthcare professionals, in-depth semi-structured telephone-interviews were conducted. In Phase A, we conducted interviews with clinical staff (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, health-care-assistants (HCAs)); these informed data collection and analysis for phase B (administrative staff). Data were analysed iteratively, using thematic analysis. ResultsIn phase A, 48 clinicians were recruited (25 GPs, 15 nurses, seven HCAs, one pharmacist) and 16 administrative staff (11 Practice-Managers, five receptionists) in phase B. Respondents were positive about primary care's ability to effectively deliver infectious disease screening. However, we found current infectious disease screening lacks a standardised approach and many practices have no system for screening meaning migrant patients are not always receiving evidence-based care (i.e., NICE/ECDC/UKHSA screening guidelines). Barriers to screening were reported at patient, staff, and system-levels. Respondents reported poor implementation of existing screening initiatives (e.g., regional latent TB screening) citing overly complex pathways that required extensive administrative/clinical time and lacked financial/expert support. Solutions included patient/staff infectious disease champions, targeted training and specialist support, simplified care pathways for screening and management of positive results, and financial incentivisation. Participants responded positively to Health Catch-UP!, stating it would systematically integrate data and support clinical decision-making, increase knowledge, reduce missed screening opportunities, and normalisation of primary care-based infectious disease screening for migrants. ConclusionsOur results suggest that implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations is not comprehensively done in UK primary care. Primary health care professionals support the concept of innovative digital tools like Health Catch-UP! and that they could significantly improve disease detection and effective implementation of screening guidance but that they require robust testing and resourcing.

55 Remote Cognitive Screening in Primary Care via a Mobile App: A Formative Usability Evaluation of MyCog Mobile

Objective:In the context of primary care, cognitive screenings are brief, non-diagnostic tests that clinicians can administer in order to provide appropriate referrals to neuropsychologists. Annual cognitive screening for adults over age 65 (“older adults”) can help monitor cognitive functioning over time and ensure more patients with cognitive impairments receive neuropsychological assessment and care earlier. Unfortunately, time constraints and lack of training present major barriers to cognitive screening in primary care, and less than half of cognitive impairment cases are identified in these settings. A remote cognitive screening mobile app has the potential to save primary care clinics time, particularly for the majority of older adults who are cognitively healthy. Moreover, a screening app well-validated for remote clinical use can replace the inadequate or nonexistent screening practices currently employed by many primary care clinics. In order to achieve their potential, remote smartphone-enabled cognitive screening paradigms must be acceptable and feasible for both patients and clinical end users. With this goal in mind, we describe the collaborative, human-centered design process and proposed implementation of MyCog Mobile (MCM), a self-administered cognitive screening app based on well-validated NIH Toolbox measures.Participants and Methods:We conducted foundational interviews with primary care clinicians (N=5) and clinic administrators (N=3) and created user journey maps of their existing and proposed cognitive screening workflows. We then conducted individual semi-structured interviews with healthy older adults (N=5) as well as participated in a community stakeholder panel of older adults and caregivers (N=11). Based on the data collected, we developed high-fidelity prototypes of the MCM app which we iteratively tested and refined with the older adult interview participants. Older adults rated the usability of the prototypes on the Simplified System Usability Scale (S-SUS) and After Scenario Questionnaire (ASQ).Results:Clinicians and administrators were eager to use a well-validated remote screening app if it saved them time in their workflows and were fully integrated into their EHR. Clinicians prioritized easily interpretable score reports tied to automated best practice guidelines. Findings from interviews and user journey mapping further informed the details of the proposed implementation and core functionality of MCM. Older adult participants were motivated to complete a remote cognitive screener to ensure they were cognitively healthy, save time during their in-person visit, and for privacy and comfort reasons. Older adults also identified several challenges to remote smartphone screening which informed the user experience design of the MCM app. The average rating across prototype versions was 91 (SD 5.18) on the SSUS and 6.13 (SD 8.40), indicating above average usability.Conclusions:Through our iterative, humancentered design process, we were able to develop a viable remote cognitive screening app and proposed implementation for primary care settings optimized for multiple stakeholders. Next steps include validating MCM in clinical and healthy populations, collaboratively developing best practice alerts for primary care EHRs with neuropsychologists, and piloting the finalized app in a community clinic. We hope the finalized MCM app will promote broader screening practices within primary care and improve early assessment and diagnosis of cognitive impairment for older adults.

Older adults’ attitudes and motivations towards learning about personal dementia risk and their willingness to make changes to improve their health in primary care settings

ABSTRACT Objective This study assessed older adults’ preferences, attitudes, and motivations to understand and change their individual risk for developing dementia via screening in primary care settings. Method Eighty-six community-dwelling older adults (aged 60–91 years, M = 74.03, SD = 6.83) completed measures of behavioural intent to undergo dementia risk screening, response efficacy (i.e., belief that screening is useful), negative affective responses (e.g., risk screening results making individuals more scared about the future), motivation to change risk-related behaviours, level of social support, depression, and anxiety symptomatology. Results Overall, participants reported positive attitudes towards dementia risk screening and risk reduction. Two ordinal logistic regressions indicated that response efficacy was a significant predictor of behavioural intent to undergo dementia risk screening, whereas self-efficacy and family history of dementia were significant predictors of motivation to change risk-related behaviours. Barriers included lack of information, motivation, and self-control. Facilitators included access to formal and informal supports, and engagement with social and non-social activities. Conclusions Dementia risk screening and risk reduction in primary care may be more desirable for those with a family history of dementia, high response efficacy, and high self-efficacy. Addressing barriers such as lack of information, motivation, and self-control may improve older adults’ engagement with dementia risk reduction.

Point-of-Care Disease Screening in Primary Care Using Saliva: A Biospectroscopy Approach for Lung Cancer and Prostate Cancer.

Saliva is a largely unexplored liquid biopsy that can be readily obtained noninvasively. Not dissimilar to blood plasma or serum, it contains a vast array of bioconstituents that may be associated with the absence or presence of a disease condition. Given its ease of access, the use of saliva is potentially ideal in a point-of-care screening or diagnostic test. Herein, we developed a swab "dip" test in saliva obtained from consenting patients participating in a lung cancer-screening programme being undertaken in north-west England. A total of 998 saliva samples (31 designated as lung-cancer positive and 17 as prostate-cancer positive) were taken in the order in which they entered the clinic (i.e., there was no selection of participants) during the course of this prospective screening programme. Samples (sterile Copan blue rayon swabs dipped in saliva) were analysed using attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy. In addition to unsupervised classification on resultant infrared (IR) spectra using principal component analysis (PCA), a range of feature selection/extraction algorithms were tested. Following preprocessing, the data were split between training (70% of samples, 22 lung-cancer positive versus 664 other) and test (30% of samples, 9 lung-cancer positive versus 284 other) sets. The training set was used for model construction and the test set was used for validation. The best model was the PCA-quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA) algorithm. This PCA-QDA model was built using 8 PCs (90.4% of explained variance) and resulted in 93% accuracy for training and 91% for testing, with clinical sensitivity at 100% and specificity at 91%. Additionally, for prostate cancer patients amongst the male cohort (n = 585), following preprocessing, the data were split between training (70% of samples, 12 prostate-cancer positive versus 399 other) and test (30% of samples, 5 prostate-cancer positive versus 171 other) sets. A PCA-QDA model, again the best model, was built using 5 PCs (84.2% of explained variance) and resulted in 97% accuracy for training and 93% for testing, with clinical sensitivity at 100% and specificity at 92%. These results point to a powerful new approach towards the capability to screen large cohorts of individuals in primary care settings for underlying malignant disease.

Feasibility and Utility of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screening Among Postpartum Patients at an Urban Safety-Net Institution.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is underdiagnosed peripartum. We administered a primary care screening tool and a pregnancy-related PTSD screening tool to postpartum patients presenting to our urban safety-net institution within 6 months of delivery, between August 2021 and February 2022. Our primary outcome was prevalence of positive PTSD screening results. Most patients (364/376, 96.8%) completed screening. Thirty (8.4%) had a positive score on at least one instrument, and seven of these 30 (23.3%) did not have a positive postpartum depression screening result. Among patients with a positive score, the majority (66.7%) obtained behavioral health follow-up. We found that routine PTSD screening for postpartum patients is feasible and identified patients at risk for PTSD. Obstetric practitioners should consider integrating PTSD screening into routine care.

Novel Methods of Identifying Individual and Neighborhood Risk Factors for Loss to Follow-Up After Ophthalmic Screening.

Residence in a middle-class neighborhood correlated with lower follow-up compared with residence in more affluent neighborhoods. The most common explanations for not following up were the process of making an appointment and lack of symptoms. To explore which individual-level and neighborhood-level factors influence follow-up as recommended after positive ophthalmic and primary care screening in a vulnerable population using novel methodologies. From 2017 to 2018, 957 participants were screened for ophthalmic disease and cardiovascular risk factors as part of the Real-Time Mobile Teleophthalmology study. Individuals who screened positive for either ophthalmic or cardiovascular risk factors were contacted to determine whether or not they followed up with a health care provider. Data from the Social Vulnerability Index, a novel virtual auditing system, and personal demographics were collected for each participant. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine which factors significantly differed between participants who followed up and those who did not. As a whole, the study population was more socioeconomically vulnerable than the national average (mean summary Social Vulnerability Index score=0.81). Participants whose neighborhoods fell in the middle of the national per capita income distribution had a lower likelihood of follow-up compared with those who resided in the most affluent neighborhoods (relative risk ratio=0.21, P -value<0.01). Participants cited the complicated process of making an eye care appointment and lack of symptoms as the most common reasons for not following up as instructed within 4 months. Residence in a middle-class neighborhood, difficulty accessing eye care appointments, and low health literacy may influence follow-up among vulnerable populations.

Enhancing Provider Mental Health Screening in Primary Care: A Quality Improvement Project.

Background: Depression and anxiety occur in 7.8% and 19.1% of the US population, respectively. About half of those patients are diagnosed in primary care. Objective: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to improve the screening and diagnosing of anxiety and/or depression among adult patients at a primary care clinic by implementing an evidence-based mental health screening interview technique. Methods: The team implemented a mental health screening interview technique that incorporates background, affect, trouble, handling, and empathy and motivational interviewing techniques in addition to self-report surveys. Pre- and post-intervention surveys were conducted to assess providers' perceptions of the new interview technique. ICD-10 code data were gathered to assess the effectiveness of the new mental health screening interview technique. Results: The number of documented diagnoses of single-episode major depressive disorder decreased by 18%, recurrent major depressive disorder increased by 34%, and anxiety disorders increased by 3%. There were more favorable provider perceptions of the new screening interview technique versus the traditional screening method. Conclusions: The results show an improvement in provider comfort and providers preferred the new mental health screening when using an evidence-based mental health screening interview technique. Implications for nursing: The results show the potential benefits of using a structured mental health interview with self-report screening tools when diagnosing anxiety and depression in primary care.

Behavior Problems in Low-Income Young Children Screened in Pediatric Primary Care

Screening of behavior problems in young children in pediatric primary care is essential to timely intervention and optimizing trajectories for social-emotional development. Identifying differential behavior problem trajectories provides guidance for tailoring prevention and treatment. To identify trajectories of behavior problems in children 2 to 6 years of age screened in pediatric primary care. This retrospective cohort study identified trajectories of behavior problems and demographic and clinical correlates. Data were collected as part of routine care in 3 pediatric primary care offices and 3 school-based health centers in Ohio serving a primarily low-income population. In total, 15 218 children aged 2 to 6 years with well-child visits between July 13, 2016, and January 31, 2022, were included. Caregivers completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at annual well-child visits. Trajectory groups were identified using latent growth mixture modeling of SDQ total difficulties scores, and relative risk ratio (RRR) of various demographic (eg, race) and clinical (eg, depression in caregiver) variables were assessed by multinomial logistic regression analysis. Of 15 281 children (51.3% males), 10 410 (68.1%) were African American or Black, 299 (2.0%) were Asian, 13 (0.1%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 876 (5.7%) were multiracial, 26 (0.2%) were Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, 2829 (18.5%) were White, and 39 (0.02%) were categorized as other. In addition, 944 (6.2%) identified as Hispanic and 14 246 (93.2%) as non-Hispanic. Four behavior problem trajectory groups reflecting severity were identified: low-stable (LS; 10 096 [66.1%]), moderate-decreasing (MD; 16.6%), low-increasing (LI; 13.1%), and high-increasing (HI; 4.3%). Relative to the LS group, patients in each elevated group were more likely to be male (HI RRR, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.55-2.26]; MD RRR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.41-1.71]; and LI RRR, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.70-2.21]), White (HI RRR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.83-2.81]; MD RRR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.13-1.45]; and LI RRR, 1.54, [95% CI, 1.32-1.81]), publicly insured (HI RRR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.84]; MD RRR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.43-0.73]; and LI RRR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.35-0.73]), have a social need (HI RRR, 3.07 [95% CI, 2.53-3.73]; MD RRR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.82-2.25]; and LI RRR, 2.12 [95% CI, 1.84-2.44]), and have a caregiver with depression (HI RRR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.38-2.00]; MD RRR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.31-1.58]; and LI RRR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.23-1.58]). Relative to the LI group, patients in the MD group were less likely to be male (RRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93). The substantial portion of young children with increased behavior problems observed in this cohort study underscores the need for screening in pediatric primary care. Caregivers with depression and family social needs warrant prioritization in early prevention and treatment to alter elevated trajectories.

Test characteristics of shorter versions of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) for brief screening for problematic substance use in a population sample from Israel

BackgroundSubstance use is a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality worldwide. Population-wide screening for problematic substance use in primary health care may mitigate the serious health and socio-economic consequences of such use, but the standard Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST 3.1) may be too long for wide-scale screening. How well validated shorter versions (ASSIST-Lite, ASSIST-FC) perform in identifying those with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use in different settings is unclear.MethodsGeneral population Jewish adults in Israel (N = 2,474) responded to an online survey that included the ASSIST 3.1 and sociodemographics. Across substances (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, sedatives, prescription stimulants, prescription painkillers), receiver operator characteristic curve analysis determined that ASSIST-FC scores performed better than ASSIST-Lite at identifying those with problematic use, and evaluated differential ASSIST-FC performance by gender or age. Test characteristics and agreement were evaluated for binary ASSIST-FC versions, with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use as the gold standard.ResultsASSIST-FC scores showed high ability to identify ASSIST 3.1 problematic use, with minimal differences by gender or age. Binary ASSIST-FC (most substances: threshold 3+; alcohol: 5+) showed high specificity and positive predictive value, acceptable sensitivity, and good agreement.ConclusionsThe ASSIST-FC, which assesses frequency of use and other’s concerns about use, appears useful for very brief screening in primary care to identify patients who may benefit from intervention. Early identification of those at-risk may prevent more severe consequences and ultimately decrease the significant costs of problematic substance use on the individual and population level.

12.4 Maternal Peripartum Depression Predicts Child Behavioral Screening in Primary Care at 4 Years

12.4 Maternal Peripartum Depression Predicts Child Behavioral Screening in Primary Care at 4 Years

Health economic analysis of the integrated cognitive assessment tool to aid dementia diagnosis in the United Kingdom.

The aim of this study was to develop a comprehensive economic evaluation of the integrated cognitive assessment (ICA) tool compared with standard cognitive tests when used for dementia screening in primary care and for initial patient triage in memory clinics. ICA was compared with standard of care comprising a mixture of cognitive assessment tools over a lifetime horizon and employing the UK health and social care perspective. The model combined a decision tree to capture the initial outcomes of the cognitive testing with a Markov structure that estimated long-term outcomes of people with dementia. Quality of life outcomes were quantified using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the economic benefits were assessed using net monetary benefit (NMB). Both costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5% per annum and cost-effectiveness was assessed using a threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. ICA dominated standard cognitive assessment tools in both the primary care and memory clinic settings. Introduction of the ICA tool was estimated to result in a lifetime cost saving of approximately £123 and £226 per person in primary care and memory clinics, respectively. QALY gains associated with early diagnosis were modest (0.0016 in primary care and 0.0027 in memory clinic). The net monetary benefit (NMB) of ICA introduction was estimated at £154 in primary care and £281 in the memory clinic settings. Introduction of ICA as a tool to screen primary care patients for dementia and perform initial triage in memory clinics could be cost saving to the UK public health and social care payer.

Racial Disparities in Lipid Screening Among Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Narrowed in Primary Care Settings Supportive of Nurse Practitioners

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most prevalent heart disease in the United States, and it disproportionately affects Black compared to White patients. Regular primary care and dyslipidemia screening and management are essential for optimal CAD care. Nurse practitioners (NPs) increasingly provide primary care services, though unsupportive practice environments may constrain their ability to do so. To examine whether disparities in lipid screening between Black and White patients with CAD were associated with the NP practice environment scores. Cross-sectional survey data from NPs in primary care practices and Medicare claims were linked to evaluate outcomes among 111,911 CAD patients (94% White, 6% Black) across 456 primary care practices in four states (California, Florida, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) in 2016. The NP-Primary Care Organizational Climate Questionnaire, which provides a score on the supportiveness of a respondent's practice, was used to evaluate the NP practice environment. Multilevel regression models that accounted for patient and practice characteristics were used to evaluate the study aim. Compared to White patients with CAD, Black patients with CAD less frequently received annual lipid screening (77.0% vs. 70.6%; p < .001). In logistic regression models accounting for patient and practice characteristics, for every standard deviation increase in the practice environment score, Black patients experienced a 5% increase in odds of receiving lipid screening. Investing in the NP practice environment, including increasing NP role visibility and strengthening relationships with physicians and administrators, may narrow racial disparities in CAD management.

Results from the BETTER WISE trial: a pragmatic cluster two arm parallel randomized controlled trial for primary prevention and screening in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic

BackgroundCancer and chronic diseases are a major cost to the healthcare system and multidisciplinary models with access to prevention and screening resources have demonstrated improvements in chronic disease management and prevention. Research demonstrated that a trained Prevention Practitioner (PP) in multidisciplinary team settings can improve achievement of patient level prevention and screening actions seven months after the intervention.MethodsWe tested the effectiveness of the PP intervention in a pragmatic two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 40–65 were randomized at the physician level to an intervention group or to a wait-list control group. The intervention consisted of a patient visit with a PP. The PP received training in prevention and screening and use of the BETTER WISE tool kit. The effectiveness of the intervention was assessed using a composite outcome of the proportion of the eligible prevention and screening actions achieved between intervention and control groups at 12-months. ResultsFifty-nine physicians were recruited in Alberta, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Of the 1,005 patients enrolled, 733 (72.9%) completed the 12-month analysis. The COVID-19 pandemic occurred during the study time frame at which time nonessential prevention and screening services were not available and in-person visits with the PP were not allowed. Many patients and sites did not receive the intervention as planned.The mean composite score was not significantly higher in patients receiving the PP intervention as compared to the control group. To understand the impact of COVID on the project, we also considered a subset of patients who had received the intervention and who attended the 12-month follow-up visit before COVID-19. This assessment demonstrated the effectiveness of the BETTER visits, similar to the findings in previous BETTER studies. ConclusionsWe did not observe an improvement in cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) outcomes at 12 months after a BETTER WISE prevention visit: due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was not implemented as planned. Though benefits were described in those who received the intervention before COVID-19, the sample size was too small to make conclusions. This study may be a harbinger of a substantial decrease and delay in CCDPS activities under COVID restrictions. Trial registrationISRCTN21333761. Registered on 19/12/2016. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21333761.

Performance of Single-Lead Handheld Electrocardiograms for Atrial Fibrillation Screening in Primary Care: The VITAL-AF Trial

BackgroundHandheld single-lead electrocardiographic (1L ECG) devices are increasingly used for atrial fibrillation (AF) screening, but their real-world performance is not well understood. ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to quantify the diagnostic test characteristics of 1L ECG automated interpretations for prospective AF screening. MethodsWe calculated the diagnostic test characteristics of the AliveCor KardiaMobile 1L ECG (AliveCor, US) algorithm using unblinded cardiologist overread as the gold standard using single 30s tracings administered by medical assistants among individuals aged ≥65 years participating in the VITAL-AF trial (NCT03515057) of population-based AF screening embedded within routine primary care. ResultsA total of 14,230 individuals (mean age 74 ± 7 years, 60% women, 82% White) had 31,376 tracings reviewed by 13 cardiologists. A total of 24,906 (79.6%) tracings had an AliveCor interpretation of normal, 5,046 (16.1%) were unclassified, 797 (2.5%) were possible AF, and 573 (1.8%) were no analysis. Cardiologists read 808 (2.6%) tracings as AF. AliveCor possible AF had a PPV of 51.7% (95% CI: 47.8%-55.6%). AliveCor normal had an NPV of 99.8% (95% CI: 99.7%-99.8%). The AliveCor algorithm had an overall sensitivity of 51.0% (95% CI: 47.1%-54.9%) and a specificity of 98.7% (95% CI: 98.6%-98.9%). AliveCor tracings interpreted as unclassified (PPV 5.9%, 95% CI: 5.1%-6.7%) and no analysis (PPV 6.5%, 95% CI: 4.6%-8.9%) had low predictive values for AF and were increasingly prevalent at older ages (13.7% for age 65-69 years to 28.1% for age ≥85 years, P < 0.01). ConclusionsIn an older primary care population undergoing AF screening with handheld 1L ECGs, automated algorithm interpretations were sufficiently accurate to exclude the presence of AF but not to establish an AF diagnosis.

Patient-stimulated fall prevention screening in primary care: analysis of provider coding changes

BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has developed an evidenced based clinical screening tool, Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths & Injuries (STEADI) but penetration into routine clinical practice has been slow. To increase screening for falls and fall risk in an internal medicine primary care practice, a patient-centered screening program was integrated into a busy academic clinic.MethodsOver a three month period, Patients were invited to self-screen via a large poster in the waiting room, and complete a STEADI Staying Independent questionnaire, and discuss findings with their healthcare provider. Fall Prevention Booklets were made readily available in clinic exam rooms. Questionnaires and fall prevention booklets, were uniquely numbered, and Epic Slicer-Dicer reports were utilized to evaluate falls screening-related ICD-10 codes determined a priori. Generalized linear modeling calculated difference-in-difference compared with other clinics without this program for rates of coding for fall-related diagnosis codes.ResultsIn three months, 255 questionnaires were taken; only 5 (2%) were returned for later review. 110 booklets were disseminated from clinic exam rooms. The absolute difference-in-difference in ICD-10 coding was 0.7% compared to other clinics in the same practice, and year before. Generalized linear modeling showed a 4.7% increased impact in screening-related ICD-10 codes, which was statistically significant (P = < .0001) without reported disruption to clinical workflows.ConclusionThere are indicators that patient-centered selective screening at a busy academic practice may have resulted in an increase in falls-related ICD-10 coding. Clinical integration of this program was well received.