Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31462280›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Implementing eScreening technology in four VA clinics: a mixed-method study.

James O E Pittman, Niloofar Afari, Elizabeth Floto, Erin Almklov, Susan Conner, Borsika Rabin, Laurie Lindamer

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

James O E PittmanVA Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA, 92161, USA. james.pittman@va.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9155-2983
Niloofar AfariVA Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA, 92161, USA.
Elizabeth FlotoVA Roseburg Health Care System, 913 NW Garden Valley Blvd, Roseburg, OR, 97470, USA.
Erin AlmklovVA Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA, 92161, USA.
Susan ConnerGallup Inc., 901 F Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20004, USA.
Borsika RabinVA Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA, 92161, USA.
Laurie LindamerVA Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA, 92161, USA.

Funding

Veterans Affairs Center for Innovation Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnology-based self-assessment (TB-SA) benefits patients and providers and has shown feasibility, ease of use, efficiency, and cost savings. A promising TB-SA, the VA eScreening program, has shown promise for the efficient and effective collection of mental and physical health information. To assist adoption of eScreening by healthcare providers, we assessed technology-related as well as individual- and system-level factors that might influence the implementation of eScreening in four diverse VA clinics.

methodsThis was a mixed-method, pre-post, quasi-experimental study originally designed as a quality improvement project. The clinics were selected to represent a range of environments that could potentially benefit from TB-SA and that made use of the variety eScreening functions. Because of limited resources, the implementation strategy consisted of staff education, training, and technical support as needed. Data was collected using pre- and post-implementation interviews or focus groups of leadership and clinical staff, eScreening usage data, and post-implementation surveys. Data was gathered on: 1) usability of eScreening; 2) knowledge about and acceptability and 3) facilitators and barriers to the successful implementation of eScreening.

resultsOverall, staff feedback about eScreening was positive. Knowledge about eScreening ranged widely between the clinics. Nearly all staff felt eScreening would fit well into their clinical setting at pre-implementation; however some felt it was a poor fit with emergent cases and older adults at post-implementation. Lack of adequate personnel support and perceived leadership support were barriers to implementation. Adequate training and technical assistance were cited as important facilitators. One clinic fully implemented eScreening, two partially implemented, and one clinic did not implement eScreening as part of normal practice after 6 months as measured by usage data and self-report. Organizational engagement survey scores were higher among clinics with full or partial implementation and low in the clinic that did not implement.

conclusionsDespite some added work load for some staff and perceived lack of leadership support, eScreening was at least partially implemented in three clinics. The technology itself posed no barriers in any of the settings. An implementation strategy that accounts for increased work burden and includes accountability may help in future eScreening implementation efforts. Note. This abstract was previously published (e.g., Annals of Behavioral Medicine 53: S1-S842, 2019).

Indexed as

AgedAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesAttitude of Health PersonnelBiomedical TechnologyCaliforniaCost SavingsEarly DiagnosisFocus GroupsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHealth Plan ImplementationHumansLeadershipOrganizational InnovationQuality ImprovementeScreeningHealth information technologyImplementationMixed methodsTechnologyVeterans

Identifiers

PMID31462280
PMCPMC6712612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.