Impact of vital signs screening & clinician prompting on alcohol and tobacco screening and intervention rates: a pre-post intervention comparison

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Though screening and intervention for alcohol and tobacco misuse are effective, primary care screening and intervention rates remain low. Previous studies have increased intervention rates using vital signs screening for tobacco misuse and clinician prompts for screen-positive patients for both alcohol and tobacco misuse. This pilot study's aims were: (1) To determine the feasibility of combined vital signs screening for tobacco and alcohol misuse, (2) To assess the impact of vital signs screening on alcohol and tobacco screening and intervention rates, and (3) To assess the additional impact of tobacco assessment prompts on intervention rates.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In five outpatient practices, nurses measuring vital signs were trained to routinely ask a single tobacco question, a prescreening question that identified current drinkers, and the single alcohol screening question for current drinkers. After 4-8 weeks, clinicians were trained in tobacco intervention and nurses were trained to give tobacco abusers a tobacco questionnaire which also served as a clinician intervention prompt. Screening and intervention rates were measured using patient exit interviews (n = 622) at baseline, during the "screening only" period, and during the tobacco prompting phase. Changes in screening and intervention rates were compared using chi square analyses and test of linear trends. Clinic staff were interviewed regarding patient and staff acceptability. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of nurse screening on clinician intervention, the impact of alcohol intervention on concurrent tobacco intervention, and the impact of tobacco intervention on concurrent alcohol intervention.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Alcohol and tobacco screening rates and alcohol intervention rates increased after implementing vital signs screening (p < .05). During the tobacco prompting phase, clinician intervention rates increased significantly for both alcohol (12.4%, p < .001) and tobacco (47.4%, p = .042). Screening by nurses was associated with clinician advice to reduce alcohol use (OR 13.1; 95% CI 6.2-27.6) and tobacco use (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.3-5.2). Acceptability was high with nurses and patients.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Vital signs screening can be incorporated in primary care and increases alcohol screening and intervention rates. Tobacco assessment prompts increase both alcohol and tobacco interventions. These simple interventions show promise for dissemination in primary care settings.</p

Providing competency-based family medicine residency training in substance abuse in the new millennium: a model curriculum

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This article, developed for the Betty Ford Institute Consensus Conference on Graduate Medical Education (December, 2008), presents a model curriculum for Family Medicine residency training in substance abuse.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The authors reviewed reports of past Family Medicine curriculum development efforts, previously-identified barriers to education in high risk substance use, approaches to overcoming these barriers, and current training guidelines of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and their Family Medicine Residency Review Committee. A proposed eight-module curriculum was developed, based on substance abuse competencies defined by Project MAINSTREAM and linked to core competencies defined by the ACGME. The curriculum provides basic training in high risk substance use to all residents, while also addressing current training challenges presented by U.S. work hour regulations, increasing international diversity of Family Medicine resident trainees, and emerging new primary care practice models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>This paper offers a core curriculum, focused on screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment, which can be adapted by residency programs to meet their individual needs. The curriculum encourages direct observation of residents to ensure that core skills are learned and trains residents with several "new skills" that will expand the basket of substance abuse services they will be equipped to provide as they enter practice.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Broad-based implementation of a comprehensive Family Medicine residency curriculum should increase the ability of family physicians to provide basic substance abuse services in a primary care context. Such efforts should be coupled with faculty development initiatives which ensure that sufficient trained faculty are available to teach these concepts and with efforts by major Family Medicine organizations to implement and enforce residency requirements for substance abuse training.</p

The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) as a screening tool for excessive drinking in primary care: reliability and validity of a French version.

BACKGROUND: Excessive drinking is a major problem in Western countries. AUDIT (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test) is a 10-item questionnaire developed as a transcultural screening tool to detect excessive alcohol consumption and dependence in primary health care settings. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to validate a French version of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). METHODS: We conducted a validation cross-sectional study in three French-speaking areas (Paris, Geneva and Lausanne). We examined psychometric properties of AUDIT as its internal consistency, and its capacity to correctly diagnose alcohol abuse or dependence as defined by DSM-IV and to detect hazardous drinking (defined as alcohol intake &gt;30 g pure ethanol per day for men and &gt;20 g of pure ethanol per day for women). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and Receiver Operator Characteristic curves. Finally, we compared the ability of AUDIT to accurately detect "alcohol abuse/dependence" with that of CAGE and MAST. RESULTS: 1207 patients presenting to outpatient clinics (Switzerland, n = 580) or general practitioners' (France, n = 627) successively completed CAGE, MAST and AUDIT self-administered questionnaires, and were independently interviewed by a trained addiction specialist. AUDIT showed a good capacity to discriminate dependent patients (with AUDIT &gt; or =13 for males, sensitivity 70.1%, specificity 95.2%, PPV 85.7%, NPV 94.7% and for females sensitivity 94.7%, specificity 98.2%, PPV 100%, NPV 99.8%); and hazardous drinkers (with AUDIT &gt; or =7, for males sensitivity 83.5%, specificity 79.9%, PPV 55.0%, NPV 82.7% and with AUDIT &gt; or =6 for females, sensitivity 81.2%, specificity 93.7%, PPV 64.0%, NPV 72.0%). AUDIT gives better results than MAST and CAGE for detecting "Alcohol abuse/dependence" as showed on the comparative ROC curves. CONCLUSIONS: The AUDIT questionnaire remains a good screening instrument for French-speaking primary care

Does the presence of a pharmacist in primary care clinics improve diabetes medication adherence?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) are an essential element of therapy for the management of type 2 diabetes, OHA adherence is often suboptimal. Pharmacists are increasingly being integrated into primary care as part of the move towards a patient-centered medical home and may have a positive influence on medication use. We examined whether the presence of pharmacists in primary care clinics was associated with higher OHA adherence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This retrospective cohort study analyzed 280,603 diabetes patients in 196 primary care clinics within the Veterans Affairs healthcare system. Pharmacists presence, number of pharmacist full-time equivalents (FTEs), and the degree to which pharmacy services are perceived as a bottleneck in each clinic were obtained from the 2007 VA Clinical Practice Organizational Survey—Primary Care Director Module. Patient-level adherence to OHAs using medication possession ratios (MPRs) were constructed using refill data from administrative pharmacy databases after adjusting for patient characteristics. Clinic-level OHA adherence was measured as the proportion of patients with MPR >= 80%. We analyzed associations between pharmacy measures and clinic-level adherence using linear regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found no significant association between pharmacist presence and clinic-level OHA adherence. However, adherence was lower in clinics where pharmacy services were perceived as a bottleneck.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Pharmacist presence, regardless of the amount of FTE, was not associated with OHA medication adherence in primary care clinics. The exact role of pharmacists in clinics needs closer examination in order to determine how to most effectively use these resources to improve patient-centered outcomes including medication adherence.</p