...
首页> 外文期刊>Addiction Science & Clinical Practice >Physician versus non-physician delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in adult primary care: the ADVISe cluster randomized controlled implementation trial
【24h】

Physician versus non-physician delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in adult primary care: the ADVISe cluster randomized controlled implementation trial

机译:医生与非医生提供酒精筛查,简要干预和转诊在成人初级保健中的治疗:建议集群随机控制实施试验

获取原文
           

摘要

Unhealthy alcohol use is a major contributor to the global burden of disease and injury. The US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended alcohol screening and intervention in general medical settings since 2004. Yet less than one in six US adults report health care professionals discussing alcohol with them. Little is known about methods for increasing implementation; different staffing models may be related to implementation effectiveness. This implementation trial compared delivery of alcohol screening, brief intervention and referral to specialty treatment (SBIRT) by physicians versus non-physician providers receiving training, technical assistance, and feedback reports. The study was a cluster randomized implementation trial (ADVISe [Alcohol Drinking as a Vital Sign]). Within a private, integrated health care system, 54 adult primary care clinics were stratified by medical center and randomly assigned in blocked groups of three to SBIRT by physicians (PCP arm) versus non-physician providers and medical assistants (NPP and MA arm), versus usual care (Control arm). NIH-recommended screening questions were added to the electronic health record (EHR) to facilitate SBIRT. We examined screening and brief intervention and referral rates by arm. We also examined patient-, physician-, and system-level factors affecting screening rates and, among those who screened positive, rates of brief intervention and referral to treatment. Screening rates were highest in the NPP and MA arm (51?%); followed by the PCP arm (9?%) and the Control arm (3.5?%). Screening increased over the 12?months after training in the NPP and MA arm but remained stable in the PCP arm. The PCP arm had higher brief intervention and referral rates (44?%) among patients screening positive than either the NPP and MA arm (3.4?%) or the Control arm (2.7?%). Higher ratio of MAs to physicians was related to higher screening rates in the NPP and MA arm and longer appointment times to screening and intervention rates in the PCP arm. Findings suggest that time frames longer than 12 months may be required for full SBIRT implementation. Screening by MAs with intervention and referral by physicians as needed can be a feasible model for increasing the implementation of this critical and under-utilized preventive health service within currently predominant primary care models. Trial registration: Clinical Trials NCT01135654
机译:不健康的酒精使用是全球疾病和伤害负担的主要贡献者。自2004年以来,美国预防性服务工作队推荐了综合医疗环境中的酒精筛查和干预。然而,六名美国成年人中不到一个报告医疗保健专业人员与他们讨论酗酒者。众所周知,关于增加实施的方法;不同的人员配置模型可能与实施有效性有关。该实施试验在医生与非医生提供者接受培训,技术援助和反馈报告的非医生提供者的特殊治疗(SBIRT)进行了酒精筛查,简短干预和转诊。该研究是一个集群随机实施试验(建议[酒精饮酒作为重要标志])。在私人综合保健系统中,54名成人初级保健诊所被医疗中心分层,并由医生(PCP ARM)与非医生提供者和医疗助理(NPP和MA ARM)随机分配3组到SBIRT组。与常规护理(控制手臂)。 NIH推荐的筛选问题被添加到电子健康记录(EHR)中,以方便SBIRT。我们通过ARM检查了筛选和简短干预和推荐率。我们还检查了影响筛选率的患者,医师和系统级因素,以及筛选阳性,短暂干预率和转诊的人。筛选率在NPP和MA臂中最高(51?%);其次是PCP臂(9?%)和控制臂(3.5?%)。在NPP和MA臂训练后的12个月内,筛选增加了12个月,但在PCP手臂中保持稳定。 PCP臂在筛选阳性比NPP和MA臂(3.4?%)或控制臂(2.7〜%)筛选较高的患者的简短干预和转诊率(44倍)。 MAS对医生的比例较高,与NPP和MA臂中的较高筛选率以及更长的约会时间来筛选PCP手臂中的筛选和介入率。调查结果表明,完整的SBIRT实施可能需要超过12个月的时间框架。根据需要通过医疗人员进行干预和推荐的MAS筛选可以是在当前主要初级保健模型中增加这种关键和利用的预防健康服务的这种关键和不利用的预防性健康服务的可行模式。审判登记:临床试验NCT01135654

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号