Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37390066›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Facilitators and barriers of routine psychosocial distress assessment within a stepped and collaborative care model in a Swiss hospital setting.

Nicola Julia Aebi, Iris Baenteli, Günther Fink, Gunther Meinlschmidt, Rainer Schaefert, Matthias Schwenkglenks, Anja Studer, Sarah Trost, Sibil Tschudin, Kaspar Wyss and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicola Julia AebiSwiss Center for International Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1956-6843
Iris BaenteliDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Günther FinkUniversity of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Gunther MeinlschmidtDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Rainer SchaefertDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Matthias SchwenkglenksInstitute of Pharmaceutical Medicine (ECPM), University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Anja StuderDivision of Prevention, Department of Health Canton Basel-Stadt, Basel, Switzerland.
Sarah TrostDepartment of Geriatric Medicine FELIX PLATTER, Basel, Switzerland.
Sibil TschudinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Kaspar WyssSwiss Center for International Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
SomPsyNet Consortium
University of Basel · CHSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHFelix Platter-Hospital · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStepped and Collaborative Care Models (SCCMs) have shown potential for improving mental health care. Most SCCMs have been used in primary care settings. At the core of such models are initial psychosocial distress assessments commonly in form of patient screening. We aimed to assess the feasibility of such assessments in a general hospital setting in Switzerland.

methodsWe conducted and analyzed eighteen semi-structured interviews with nurses and physicians involved in a recent introduction of a SCCM model in a hospital setting, as part of the SomPsyNet project in Basel-Stadt. Following an implementation research approach, we used the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework for analysis. The TICD distinguishes seven domains: guideline factors, individual healthcare professional factors, patient factors, professional interactions, incentives and resources, capacity for organizational change, and social, political, and legal factors. Domains were split into themes and subthemes, which were used for line-by-line coding.

resultsNurses and physicians reported factors belonging to all seven TICD domains. An appropriate integration of the psychosocial distress assessment into preexisting hospital processes and information technology systems was the most important facilitator. Subjectivity of the assessment, lack of awareness about the assessment, and time constraints, particularly among physicians, were factors undermining and limiting the implementation of the psychosocial distress assessment.

conclusionsAwareness raising through regular training of new employees, feedback on performance and patient benefits, and working with champions and opinion leaders can likely support a successful implementation of routine psychosocial distress assessments. Additionally, aligning psychosocial distress assessments with workflows is essential to assure the sustainability of the procedure in a working context with commonly limited time.

Indexed as

EthnicityHospitals, GeneralBlood Coagulation TestsHealth PersonnelHumansSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID37390066
PMCPMC10313032
OpenAlexW4382752054

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.