ArticleJournal of community health2020
Improving HCV Risk Assessment and Testing in a Federally Qualified Health Center Setting in Baltimore, Maryland.
Article in Journal of community health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Approximately 4.1 million adults in the United States have past or current hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Despite efforts to test at least once for the 1945-1965 birth cohort population and others identified at risk, the completion of the annual risk assessment tool and testing of these patients has been suboptimal. The aim of this project was to reduce HCV risk assessment and testing barriers and improve both these rates by 30% within a federally qualified health center setting in Baltimore, Maryland. As part of ongoing efforts to promote HCV risk screening and testing, targeted interventions of staff education, streamlined risk screening assessment, automated electronic health record alerts, push reports, and standing orders were integrated into current screening and testing practices. This study examined the risk assessment tool use and testing rates for 1 month before and after project implementation. All patients who were seen for a primary care visit during the month preceding (n = 8911) and following (n = 8228) the intervention were evaluated. A total of 2973 risk assessments and 1831 HCV tests were completed pre-intervention compared to 3708 risk assessments and 3790 tests post-intervention, demonstrating a 35% and 125% improvement respectively. Seropositivity prevalence of 2.1% pre-intervention increased to 2.9% post-intervention. Efficiencies in workflow processes and staff education successfully impacted the HCV risk screening tool completions and testing rates for the birth cohort and non-birth cohort patients. Integrating such strategies in the primary care workflow can increase HCV detection and timely follow up for vulnerable populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.