Screening for social and environmental problems in a VA primary care setting

Screening for poverty and related social determinants to improve knowledge of and links to resources (SPARK): development and cognitive testing of a tool for primary care

BACKGROUND

Healthcare organizations are increasingly exploring ways to address the social determinants of health. Accurate data on social determinants is essential to identify opportunities for action to improve health outcomes, to identify patterns of inequity, and to help evaluate the impact of interventions. The objective of this study was to refine a standardized tool for the collection of social determinants data through cognitive testing.

METHODS

An initial set of questions on social determinants for use in healthcare settings was developed by a collaboration of hospitals and a local public health organization in Toronto, Canada during 2011-2012. Subsequent research on how patients interpreted the questions, and how they performed in primary care and other settings led to revisions. We administered these questions and conducted in-depth cognitive interviews with all the participants, who were from Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Cognitive interviewing was used, with participants invited to verbalize thoughts and feelings as they read the questions. Interview notes were grouped thematically, and high frequency themes were addressed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventy-five individuals responded to the study advertisements and 195 ultimately participated in the study. Although all interviews were conducted in English, participants were diverse. For many, the value of this information being collected in typical healthcare settings was unclear, and hence, we included descriptors for each question. In general, the questions were understood, but participants highlighted a number of ways the questions could be changed to be even clearer and more inclusive. For example, more response options were added to the question of sexual orientation and the "making ends meet" question was completely reworded in light of challenges to understand the informal phrasing cited by English as a Second Language (ESL) users of the tool.

CONCLUSION

In this work we have refined an initial set of 16 sociodemographic and social needs questions into a simple yet comprehensive 18-question tool. The changes were largely related to wording, rather than content. These questions require validation against accepted, standardized tools. Further work is required to enable community data governance, and to ensure implementation of the tool as well as the use of its data is successful in a range of organizations.

Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review

Objective

We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics.

Methods

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual on scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) for quantitative and qualitative studies in English, Spanish, French, and German with no time limit. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open.

Results

Of the 839 articles identified, 66 met the criteria for study eligibility, from which 61 instruments were identified. The publications were from 18 different countries, with most studies employing an observational design and including mostly adult patients. Among all instruments, 22 were reported as validated, which we present in this paper. Overall, quality criteria were reported differently, with studies generally providing little detail. Most of the instruments were used as paper and pencil questionnaires. We found considerable heterogeneity in the theoretical conceptualisation, definition, and measurement of PSPs, ranging from psychiatric case findings to specific social problems.

Discussion and conclusion

This review presents a number of tools and methods that have been studied and used in general practice research. Adapted and tailored to local circumstances, practice populations, and needs, they could be useful for identifying patients with PSPs in daily GP practice; however, this requires further research. Given the heterogeneity of studies and instruments, future research efforts should include both a more structured evaluation of instruments and the incorporation of consensus methods to move forward from instrument research to actual use in daily practice.

Psychometric and Pragmatic Properties of Social Risk Screening Tools: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Health systems increasingly are exploring implementation of standardized social risk assessments. Implementation requires screening tools both with evidence of validity and reliability (psychometric properties) and that are low cost, easy to administer, readable, and brief (pragmatic properties). These properties for social risk assessment tools are not well understood and could help guide selection of assessment tools and future research.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The systematic review was conducted during 2018 and included literature from PubMed and CINAHL published between 2000 and May 18, 2018. Included studies were based in the U.S., included tools that addressed at least 2 social risk factors (economic stability, education, social and community context, healthcare access, neighborhood and physical environment, or food), and were administered in a clinical setting. Manual literature searching was used to identify empirical uses of included screening tools. Data on psychometric and pragmatic properties of each tool were abstracted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Review of 6,838 unique citations yielded 21 unique screening tools and 60 articles demonstrating empirical uses of the included screening tools. Data on psychometric properties were sparse, and few tools reported use of gold standard measurement development methods. Review of pragmatic properties indicated that tools were generally low cost, written for low-literacy populations, and easy to administer.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple low-cost, low literacy tools are available for social risk screening in clinical settings, but psychometric data are very limited. More research is needed on clinic-based screening tool reliability and validity as these factors should influence both adoption and utility.

SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION

This article is part of a supplement entitled Identifying and Intervening on Social Needs in Clinical Settings: Evidence and Evidence Gaps, which is sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kaiser Permanente, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

A systematic review of reasons for and against asking patients about their socioeconomic contexts

Background

People’s social and economic circumstances are important determinants of their health, health experiences, healthcare access, and healthcare outcomes. However, patients’ socioeconomic circumstances are rarely asked about or documented in healthcare settings. We conducted a systematic review of published reasons for why patients’ socioeconomic contexts (including education, employment, occupation, housing, income, or wealth) should, or should not, be enquired about.

Methods

Systematic review of literature published up to and including 2016. A structured literature search using databases of medicine and nursing (pubmed, embase, global health), ethics (Ethicsweb), social sciences (Web of Science), and psychology (PsychINFO) was followed by a ‘snowball’ search. Eligible publications contained one or more reasons for: asking patients about socioeconomic circumstances; collecting patients’ socioeconomic information; ‘screening’ patients for adverse socioeconomic circumstances; or linking other sources of individual socioeconomic data to patients’ healthcare records. Two authors conducted the screening: the first screened all references, the second author screened a 20% sample with inter-rater reliability statistically confirmed. ‘Reason data’ was extracted from eligible publications by two authors, then analysed and organised.

Results

We identified 138 eligible publications. Most offered reasons for why patients’ should be asked about their socioeconomic circumstances. Reasons included potential improvements in: individual healthcare outcomes; healthcare service monitoring and provision; population health research and policies. Many authors also expressed concerns for improving equity in health. Eight publications suggested patients should not be asked about their socioeconomic circumstances, due to: potential harms; professional boundaries; and the information obtained being inaccurate or unnecessary.

Conclusions

This first summary of literature on the subject found many published reasons for why patients’ social and economic circumstances should be enquired about in healthcare settings. These reasons include potential benefits at the levels of individuals, health service provision, and population, as well as the potential to improve healthcare equity. Cautions and caveats include concerns about the clinician’s role in responding to patients’ social problems; the perceived importance of social health determinants compared with biomedical factors; the use of average population data from geographic areas to infer the socioeconomic experience of individuals. Actual evidence of outcomes is lacking: our review suggests hypotheses that can be tested in future research.

A scoping review of military veterans involved in the criminal justice system and their health and healthcare

BACKGROUND

In the criminal justice system, special populations, such as older adults or patients with infectious diseases, have been identified as particularly vulnerable to poor health outcomes. Military veterans involved in the criminal justice system are also a vulnerable population warranting attention because of their unique healthcare needs. This review aims to provide an overview of existing literature on justice-involved veterans' health and healthcare to identify research gaps and inform policy and practice.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted to identify research articles related to justice-involved veterans' health and healthcare that were published prior to December 2017. Study characteristics including healthcare category, study design, sample size, and funding source were extracted and summarized with the aim of providing an overview of extant literature.

RESULTS

The search strategy initially identified 1830 unique abstracts with 1387 abstracts then excluded. Full-text review of 443 articles was conducted with 252 excluded. There were 191 articles included, most related to veterans' mental health (130/191, 68%) or homelessness (24/191, 13%). Most studies used an observational design (173/191, 91%).

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge gaps identified from the review provide guidance on future areas of research. Studies on different sociodemographic groups, medical conditions, and the management of multiple conditions and psychosocial challenges are needed. Developing and testing interventions, especially randomized trials, to address justice-involved veterans care needs will help to improve their health and healthcare. Finally, an integrated conceptual framework that draws from diverse disciplines, such as criminology, health services, psychology, and implementation science is needed to inform research, policy and practice focused on justice-involved veterans.

Health benefits of primary care social work for adults with complex health and social needs: a systematic review

The prevalence of complex health and social needs in primary care patients is growing. Furthermore, recent research suggests that the impact of psychosocial distress on the significantly poorer health outcomes in this population may have been underestimated. The potential of social work in primary care settings has been extensively discussed in both health and social work literature and there is evidence that social work interventions in other settings are particularly effective in addressing psychosocial needs. However, the evidence base for specific improved health outcomes related to primary care social work is minimal. This review aimed to identify and synthesise the available evidence on the health benefits of social work interventions in primary care settings. Nine electronic databases were searched from 1990 to 2015 and seven primary research studies were retrieved. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Although there is no definitive evidence for effectiveness, results suggest a promising role for primary care social work interventions in improving health outcomes. These include subjective health measures and self-management of long-term conditions, reducing psychosocial morbidity and barriers to treatment and health maintenance. Although few rigorous study designs were found, the contextual detail and clinical settings of studies provide evidence of the practice applicability of social work intervention. Emerging policy on the integration of health and social care may provide an opportunity to develop this model of care.

Self-reported patient psychosocial needs in integrated primary health care: A role for social work in interdisciplinary teams

Despite being identified as significant determinants of health, depression and anxiety continue to be underdiagnosed and undertreated in primary care settings. This study examined the psychosocial health needs of patients at four urban interdisciplinary primary health teams. Quantitative analysis revealed that nearly 80% of patients reported anxiety and/or depression. Self-reported anxiety and depression was correlated with poor social relationships, compromised health status and underdeveloped problem-solving skills. These findings suggest that social workers have a vital role to play within interdisciplinary primary health teams in the amelioration of factors associated with anxiety and depression.

Developing a reliable and valid scale to measure psychosocial acuity

This tool is a unique comprehensive scale and methodology to measure the psychosocial acuity of patients and families across a health care continuum. Coupled with other measures, psychosocial acuity can tell a complete and compelling story of social work contributions and aid in resource alignment. Accurately conveying the full scope of social work value to anyone, especially health system leadership, requires that the psychosocial acuity of the patient and family be measured and factored into the equation, along with productivity, time spent, and services provided. The development and utilization of the Psychosocial Acuity Tool is the focus of this publication.

Psychosocial issues within primary health care settings: challenges and opportunities for social work practice

Given the important role of primary health care and the impact of psychosocial issues on health care, the records of individuals referred to social workers in two urban health care clinics serving low-income individuals were analyzed. Major psychosocial issues included family problems, depression, anxiety, substance abuse, sexual abuse, and violence. Women were more likely to have suffered violence while many of the men had problems dealing with their own aggression toward others. Women with depressive symptoms were more likely than other women to report substance abuse, financial problems, sexual abuse, anxiety, and physical problems. Implications for training and practice are discussed.

Women's help-seeking patterns for depression

Depression tends not to be accurately identified and treated in primary care settings. Women of color are especially likely to use these settings for mental health issues but are less likely to be diagnosed appropriately. A study was conducted within four Florida primary care clinics serving primarily low-income families. Participants included 321 women (Black, 22%, Hispanic, 23.5%, White, 38.6%) who completed a confidential questionnaire while waiting to be seen by clinic staff. Ten percent reported recent major depression, with 26.7% indicating depressive symptoms during the past two years. Depressed women were significantly more likely to report physical violence during the past year. Respondents turned primarily to family, friends, and medical clinics for their depression. They found turning to clinic staff to be helpful and described psychosocial interventions as useful. Members of all ethnic/racial groups reported barriers to seeking help, including perceived separation between mental health and general health and stigma. Implications are discussed in terms of appropriate community education and screening procedures.