Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25731916›Full record

Observational studyJournal of general internal medicine2015

Factors Underlying Quality Problems with Alcohol Screening Prompted by a Clinical Reminder in Primary Care: A Multi-site Qualitative Study.

Emily C Williams, Carol E Achtmeyer, Rachel M Thomas, Joel R Grossbard, Gwen T Lapham, Laura J Chavez, Evette J Ludman, Douglas Berger, Katharine A Bradley

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of general internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed
21.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emily C WilliamsHealth Services Research & Development (HSR&D), Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, Veterans Affairs (VA) Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA, emily.williams3@va.gov.
Carol E Achtmeyer
Rachel M Thomas
Joel R Grossbard
Gwen T Lapham
Laura J Chavez
Evette J Ludman
Douglas Berger
Katharine A Bradley
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USUniversity of Washington · USVA Puget Sound Health Care System · US

Funding

University of Washington Health Services Research Training ProgramT32HS013853 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WEINER, BRYAN J., WILLIAMS, EMILY CATERINA · 2003 to 2024
$6.9M
IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES IRI-MHSR25MH080916 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Byron James Powell · 2009 to 2026
$3.7M
Unhealthy Drinking in Older Adults: 30-day Readmissions and Emergency CareR36HS022800 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CHAVEZ, LAURA JOHNSON · 2013 to 2013
$42k
Implementation Research for Evidence-based Care for Alcohol DependenceIK2HX001161 · VA · VA PUGET SOUND HEALTHCARE SYSTEM · PI WILLIAMS, EMILY CATERINA · 2015 to 2015
–
AHRQ HHS 1R36HS022800-01AHRQ HHS R36 HS022800AHRQ HHS T32 HS013853HSRD VA IK2 HX001161NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH080916NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH080916-01A2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPopulation-based alcohol screening is recommended in primary care, and increasingly incentivized by policies, yet is challenging to implement. The U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VA) achieved high rates of screening using a national performance measure and associated electronic clinical reminder to prompt and facilitate screening and document results. However, the sensitivity of alcohol screening for identifying unhealthy alcohol use is low in VA clinics.

objectiveWe aimed to understand factors that might contribute to low sensitivity of alcohol screening.

designThis was an observational, qualitative study.

participantsParticipants included clinical staff responsible for conducting alcohol screening and nine independently managed primary care clinics of a single VA medical center in the Northwestern U.S. APPROACH: Four researchers observed clinical staff as they conducted alcohol screening. Observers took handwritten notes, which were transcribed and coded iteratively. Template analysis identified a priori and emergent themes. KEY

resultsWe observed 72 instances of alcohol screening conducted by 31 participating staff. Observations confirmed known challenges to implementation of care using clinical reminders, including workflow and flexibility limitations. Three themes specific to alcohol screening emerged. First, most observed screening was conducted verbally, guided by the clinical reminder, although some variability in approaches to screening (e.g., paper-based or laminate-based screening) was observed. Second, specific verbal screening practices that might contribute to low sensitivity of clinical screening were identified, including conducting non-verbatim screening and making inferences, assumptions, and/or suggestions to input responses. Third, staff introduced and adapted screening questions to enhance patient comfort.

conclusionsThis qualitative study in nine clinics found that implementation of alcohol screening facilitated by a clinical reminder resulted primarily in verbal screening in which questions were not asked vertbatim and were otherwise adapted. Non-verbal approaches to screening, or patient self-administration, may enhance validity and standardization of screening while simultaneously addressing limitations of the clinical reminder and issues related to perceived discomfort.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningQuality of Health CareReminder SystemsAlcoholismAllied Health PersonnelHealth Plan ImplementationHumansNursesQualitative ResearchSubstance Abuse DetectionVeteransVeterans Health

Identifiers

PMID25731916
PMCPMC4510245
OpenAlexW2130135269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.