Parenting is central to the health and well-being of children. Children with developmental disabilities have been shown to be at increased risk of developing emotional and behavioral problems. Parent training programs are effective interventions for improving child behavior and family functioning. This paper describes the outcomes of a brief 4-session parenting intervention (Primary Care Stepping Stones Triple P) targeting compliance and cooperative play skills in an 8-year-old girl with Asperger's disorder and ADHD combined type. The intervention was associated with decreases in child behavior problems, increases in parenting confidence, and decreases in dysfunctional parenting styles. This paper demonstrates that low-intensity parenting interventions can lead to significant improvements in child behavior and family functioning. Such brief interventions are cost effective, can be widely disseminated, and have been designed to be delivered within primary health care settings. Pediatricians can play a key role in identifying parents in need of assistance and in helping them access evidence-based parenting interventions.
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of an evidence-based health care intervention depends on it being delivered consistently to appropriate patients. Brief alcohol intervention is known to be effective at reducing excessive drinking and its concomitant health and social problems. However, a recent implementation trial reported partial delivery of brief alcohol intervention by general practitioners (GPs) which is likely to have reduced its impact. AIM: To investigate patient-practitioner characteristics influencing brief alcohol intervention in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional analysis of 12,814 completed Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) screening questionnaires. SETTING: Eighty-four GPs who had implemented a brief alcohol intervention programme in a previous trial based in the Northeast of England. METHOD: GPs were requested to screen all adults (aged over 16 years) presenting to their surgery and follow a structured protocol to give a brief intervention (five minutes of advice plus an information booklet) to all 'risk' drinkers. Anonymized carbon copies of the screening questionnaire were collected from all practices after a three-month implementation period. RESULTS: Although AUDIT identified 4080 'risk' drinkers, only 2043 (50%) received brief intervention. Risk drinkers that were most likely to receive brief intervention were males (58%), unemployed (61%), and technically-trained patients (55%). Risk drinkers that were least likely to receive brief intervention were females (44%), students (38%), and university educated patients (46%). Logistic regression modelling showed that patients' risk status was the most influential predictor of brief intervention. Also, GPs' experience of relevant training and longer average practice consultations predicted brief intervention. However, personal characteristics relating to patients and GPs also predicted brief intervention in routine practice. CONCLUSION: Interpersonal factors relating to patients and practitioners contributed to the selective provision of brief alcohol intervention in primary care. Ways should be found to remedy this situation or the impact of this evidence-based intervention may be reduced when implemented in routine practice.
Findings to date indicate that it is feasible to deliver a brief behavioral risk reduction/medication adherence group intervention to HIV-infected IDUs in a community-based setting. HIV infection and substance abuse can result in neurocognitive impairment and this is directly relevant to intervention development because a significant number of people living with HIV/AIDS have a positive history of substance abuse and being able to successfully participate in behavioral interventions often requires a relatively high level of cognitive performance. The aim of the current study was to evaluate if changes in information, motivation and behavior skills with respect to medication adherence, sex- and drug-risk behavior outcomes from baseline to post-intervention is predicted by cognitive impairment following the brief 4-session Holistic Health for HIV intervention for HIV-infected Drug Users (3H+). Significant associations were found between change in motivation and certain neurocognitive performance domains. Findings suggest that it may be helpful to specifically tailor such behavioral interventions to accommodate cognitive impairment.
Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) is a public health approach to the delivery of early intervention and treatment services for individuals at risk of developing substance use disorders (SUDs) and those who have already developed these disorders. SBIRT can be flexibly applied; therefore, it can be delivered in many clinical care settings. SBIRT has been adapted for use in hospital emergency settings, primary care centers, office- and clinic-based practices, and other community settings, providing opportunities for early intervention with at-risk substance users before more severe consequences occur. In addition, SBIRT interventions can include the provision of brief treatment for those with less severe SUDs and referrals to specialized substance abuse treatment programs for those with more severe SUDs. Screening large numbers of individuals presents an opportunity to engage those who are in need of treatment. However, additional research is needed to determine how best to implement SBIRT.
brief intervention; referral to treatment; SBIRT; screening; substance use disorders
High levels of adherence to medications for HIV infection are essential for optimal clinical outcomes and to reduce viral transmission, but many patients do not achieve required levels. Clinician-delivered interventions can improve patients’ adherence, but usually require substantial effort by trained individuals and may not be widely available. Computer-delivered interventions can address this problem by reducing required staff time for delivery and by making the interventions widely available via the Internet. We previously developed a computer-delivered intervention designed to improve patients’ level of health literacy as a strategy to improve their HIV medication adherence. The intervention was shown to increase patients’ adherence, but it was not clear that the benefits resulting from the increase in adherence could justify the costs of developing and deploying the intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relation of development and deployment costs to the effectiveness of the intervention.
Costs of intervention development were drawn from accounting reports for the grant under which its development was supported, adjusted for costs primarily resulting from the project’s research purpose. Effectiveness of the intervention was drawn from results of the parent study. The relation of the intervention’s effects to changes in health status, expressed as utilities, was also evaluated in order to assess the net cost of the intervention in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses evaluated ranges of possible intervention effectiveness and durations of its effects, and costs were evaluated over several deployment scenarios.
The intervention’s cost effectiveness depends largely on the number of persons using it and the duration of its effectiveness. Even with modest effects for a small number of patients the intervention was associated with net cost savings in some scenarios and for durations greater than three months and longer it was usually associated with a favorable cost per QALY. For intermediate and larger assumed effects and longer durations of intervention effectiveness, the intervention was associated with net cost savings.
Computer-delivered adherence interventions may be a cost-effective strategy to improve adherence in persons treated for HIV.
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01304186.
HIV; Cost effectiveness analysis; QALY; Computer intervention; Medication adherence
To determine the effects of a brief psychological intervention (brief psychodynamic interpersonal therapy) for patients after deliberate self poisoning compared with usual treatment. To compare the impact of the active intervention and usual treatment on patients' satisfaction with care.
Randomised controlled trial.
119 adults who had deliberately poisoned themselves and presented to the emergency department of a teaching hospital.
Community based study.
Four sessions of therapy delivered in the patient's home. Control patients received “treatment as usual,” which in most cases consisted of referral back to their general practitioner.
Severity of suicidal ideation six months after treatment as assessed by the Beck scale for suicidal ideation. Secondary outcome measures at six month follow up included depressive symptoms as measured by the Beck depression inventory, patient satisfaction with treatment, and self reported subsequent attempts at self harm.
Participants randomised to the intervention had a significantly greater reduction in suicidal ideation at six month follow up compared with those in the control group (reduction in the mean (SD) Beck scale 8.0 v 1.5). They were more satisfied with their treatment and were less likely to report repeated attempts to harm themselves at follow up (proportion repeating 9% v 28% in control group; difference 19%, 95% confidence interval 9% to 30 %, P=0.009).
Brief psychodynamic interpersonal therapy may be a valuable treatment after people have deliberately tried to poison themselves.
What is already known on this topicDeliberate self poisoning is one of the commonest reasons for admission to hospital in the United Kingdom and up to 15% of patients who poison themselves eventually kill themselvesThere are no interventions of proved efficacy for these patientsMost episodes of self poisoning are precipitated by some form of interpersonal problemWhat this study addsCompared with usual treatment four sessions of psychodynamic interpersonal therapy reduced suicidal ideation and self reported attempts at self harmThe intervention also improved patients' satisfaction with care
To assess the cost effectiveness of ultrasound screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Primary analysis: four year cost effectiveness analysis based directly on results from a randomised controlled trial in which patients were individually allocated to invitation to ultrasound screening (intervention) or to a control group not offered screening. Secondary analysis: projection of the data, based on conservative assumptions, to indicate likely cost effectiveness at 10 years.
Four centres in the United Kingdom. Screening delivered in primary care settings with follow up and surgery offered in the main hospitals
Population based sample of 67 800 men aged 65-74 years.
Main outcome measures
Mortality from and costs (screening, follow up, elective and emergency surgery) related to abdominal aortic aneurysm; cost per life year gained.
Over four years there were 47 fewer deaths related to abdominal aortic aneurysms in the screening group than in the control group, but the additional costs incurred were £2.2m. After adjustment for censoring and discounted at 6% the mean additional cost of the screening programme was £63.39 ($97.77, €100.48) (95% confidence interval £53.31 to £73.48) per patient. The hazard ratio for abdominal aortic aneurysm was 0.58 (0.42 to 0.78). Over four years the mean incremental cost effectiveness ratio for screening was £28 400 (£15 000 to £146 000) per life year gained, equivalent to about £36 000 per quality adjusted life year. After 10 years this figure is estimated to fall to around £8000 per life year gained.
Even at four years the cost effectiveness of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms is at the margin of acceptability according to current NHS thresholds. Over a longer period the cost effectiveness will improve substantially, the predicted ratio at 10 years falling to around a quarter of the four year figure.
What is already known on this topicSmall trials have suggested that an ultrasound screening programme to detect abdominal aortic aneurysms in older men may be effectiveThere is uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of routine screening, with widely varying estimatesWhat this study addsA cost effectiveness analysis of data from a large randomised trial with follow up over four years showed 47 fewer deaths and additional costs of £2.2m in the group invited to screeningThe adjusted net cost per patient was £63.39 and per life year gained was £28 400The projected cost per life year gained after 10 years was £8000, which is substantially lower than the perceived NHS threshold value
Objective To determine the effectiveness of programmes of screening in general practice for excessive alcohol use and providing brief interventions.
Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that used screening as a precursor to brief intervention.
Setting General practice.
Main outcome measures Number needed to treat, proportion of patients positive on screening, proportion given brief interventions, and effect of screening.
Results The eight studies included for meta-analysis all used health questionnaires for screening, and the brief interventions included feedback, information, and advice. The studies contained several sources of bias that might lead to overestimates of the effects of intervention. External validity was compromised because typically three out of four people identified by screening as excessive users of alcohol did not qualify for the intervention after a secondary assessment. Overall, in 1000 screened patients, 90 screened positive and required further assessment, after which 25 qualified for brief intervention; after one year 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 3.4) reported they drank less than the maximum recommended level.
Conclusions Although even brief advice can reduce excessive drinking, screening in general practice does not seem to be an effective precursor to brief interventions targeting excessive alcohol use. This meta-analysis raises questions about the feasibility of screening in general practice for excessive use of alcohol.
Effective implementation of evidence-based interventions in “real-world” settings can be challenging. Interventions based on externally valid trial findings can be even more difficult to apply in resource-limited settings, given marked differences—in provider experience, patient population, and health systems—between those settings and the typical clinical trial environment. Under the auspices of the Integrated Management of Physician-Delivered Alcohol Care for Tuberculosis Patients (IMPACT) study, a randomized, controlled effectiveness trial, and as an integrated component of tuberculosis treatment in Tomsk, Russia, we adapted two proven alcohol interventions to the delivery of care to 200 patients with alcohol use disorders. Tuberculosis providers performed screening for alcohol use disorders and also delivered naltrexone (with medical management) or a brief counseling intervention either independently or in combination as a seamless part of routine care. We report the innovations and challenges to intervention design, training, and delivery of both pharmacologic and behavioral alcohol interventions within programmatic tuberculosis treatment services. We also discuss the implications of these lessons learned within the context of meeting the challenge of providing evidence-based care in resource-limited settings.
alcohol; global health; implementation; resource-limited settings; resource-poor settings; Russia; tuberculosis
Effective implementation of evidence-based interventions in “real-world” settings can be challenging. Interventions based on externally valid trial findings can be even more difficult to apply in resource-limited settings, given marked differences—in provider experience, patient population, and health systems—between those settings and the typical clinical trial environment. Under the auspices of the Integrated Management of Physician-Delivered Alcohol Care for Tuberculosis Patients (IMPACT) study, a randomized, controlled effectiveness trial, and as an integrated component of tuberculosis treatment in Tomsk, Russia, we adapted two proven alcohol interventions to the delivery of care to 200 patients with alcohol use disorders. Tuberculosis providers performed screening for alcohol use disorders and also delivered naltrexone (with medical management) or a brief counseling intervention either independently or in combination as a seamless part of routine care. We report the innovations and challenges to intervention design, training, and delivery of both pharmacologic and behavioral alcohol interventions within programmatic tuberculosis treatment services. We also discuss the implications of these lessons learned within the context of meeting the challenge of providing evidence-based care in resource-limited settings. (Harv Rev Psychiatry 2012;20:58–67.)
alcohol; global health; implementation; resource-limited settings; resource-poor settings; Russia; tuberculosis
Alcohol misuse is a significant international public health problem. Screening and brief intervention (SBI) in primary care reduces alcohol consumption by about 15 – 30%, sustained over 12 months in hazardous or harmful drinkers but implementation has proved difficult leading to growing interest in exploring the effectiveness of SBI in other settings, including the workplace. Computerised interventions for alcohol misuse can be as effective as traditional face-to-face interventions and may have advantages, including anonymity, convenience and availability.
Individually randomised controlled trial to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering online screening and brief intervention for alcohol misuse in a workplace. Participants: adults (aged 18 or over) employed by participating employers scoring 5 or more on a three item screen for alcohol misuse (the AUDIT-C) indicating possible hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption, recruited through the offer of an online health check providing screening for a range of health behaviours with personalised feedback. Participants who accept the health check and score 5 or more on the alcohol screen will be randomised to receiving immediate feedback on their alcohol consumption and access to an online intervention offering support in reducing alcohol consumption (Down Your Drink) or delayed feedback and access to Down Your Drink after completion of follow-up data at three months. All employees who take the online health check will receive personalised feedback on other screened health behaviours including diet, physical activity, smoking, and body mass index. The primary outcome is alcohol consumption in the past week at three months; secondary outcomes are the AUDIT, EQ-5D, days off work, number and duration of hospital admissions, costs and use of the intervention. A sample size of 1,472 participants (736 in each arm) provides 90% power with 5% significance to determine a 20% reduction in alcohol consumption. Outcomes between groups at three months will be compared following the intention to treat principle and economic analyses will follow NICE guidance.
This innovative design avoids recruitment bias by not mentioning alcohol in the invitation and avoids reactivity of assessment by not collecting baseline data on alcohol consumption.
Alcohol-related disorders; Alcohol; Screening and brief intervention; Internet; Randomised; Controlled trial; Workplace; Health promotion
Objectives To assess whether the mortality benefit from screening men aged 65-74 for abdominal aortic aneurysm decreases over time, and to estimate the long term cost effectiveness of screening.
Design Randomised trial with 10 years of follow-up.
Setting Four centres in the UK. Screening and surveillance was delivered mainly in primary care settings, with follow-up and surgery offered in hospitals.
Participants Population based sample of 67 770 men aged 65-74.
Interventions Participants were individually allocated to invitation to ultrasound screening (invited group) or to a control group not offered screening. Patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm detected at screening underwent surveillance and were offered surgery if they met predefined criteria.
Main outcome measures Mortality and costs related to abdominal aortic aneurysm, and cost per life year gained.
Results Over 10 years 155 deaths related to abdominal aortic aneurysm (absolute risk 0.46%) occurred in the invited group and 296 (0.87%) in the control group (relative risk reduction 48%, 95% confidence interval 37% to 57%). The degree of benefit seen in earlier years of follow-up was maintained in later years. Based on the 10 year trial data, the incremental cost per man invited to screening was £100 (95% confidence interval £82 to £118), leading to an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of £7600 (£5100 to £13 000) per life year gained. However, the incidence of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in those originally screened as normal increased noticeably after eight years.
Conclusions The mortality benefit of screening men aged 65-74 for abdominal aortic aneurysm is maintained up to 10 years and cost effectiveness becomes more favourable over time. To maximise the benefit from a screening programme, emphasis should be placed on achieving a high initial rate of attendance and good adherence to clinical follow-up, preventing delays in undertaking surgery, and maintaining a low operative mortality after elective surgery. On the basis of current evidence, rescreening of those originally screened as normal is not justified.
Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37381646.
Alcohol screening and brief interventions in medical settings can significantly reduce alcohol use. Corresponding data for illicit drug use is sparse. A Federally funded Screening, Brief Intervention, Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) service program, the largest of its kind to date, was initiated by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) in a wide variety of medical settings. We compared illicit drug use at intake and six months after drug screening and interventions were administered.
SBIRT services were implemented in a range of medical settings across six states. A diverse patient population (Alaska Natives, American Indians, African-Americans, Caucasians, Hispanics), was screened and offered score-based progressive levels of intervention (brief intervention, brief treatment, referral to specialty treatment). In this secondary analysis of the SBIRT service program, drug use data was compared at intake and at a six month follow-up, in a sample of a randomly selected population (10%) that screened positive at baseline.
Of 459,599 patients screened, 22.7% screened positive for a spectrum of use (risky/problematic, abuse/addiction). The majority were recommended for a brief intervention (15.9%), with a smaller percentage recommended for brief treatment (3.2%) or referral to specialty treatment (3.7%). Among those reporting baseline illicit drug use, rates of drug use at 6 month follow-up (4 of 6 sites), were 67.7% lower (p < 0.001) and heavy alcohol use was 38.6% lower (p < 0.001), with comparable findings across sites, gender, race/ethnic, age subgroups. Among persons recommended for brief treatment or referral to specialty treatment, self-reported improvements in general health (p < 0.001), mental health (p < 0.001), employment (p < 0.001), housing status (p < 0.001), and criminal behavior (p < 0.001) were found.
SBIRT was feasible to implement and the self-reported patient status at six months indicated significant improvements over baseline, for illicit drug use and heavy alcohol use, with functional domains improved, across a range of health care settings and a range of patients.
services; treatment; prescription drug abuse; preventive medicine; marijuana; cocaine; heroin; methamphetamine; CPT® codes; primary health care; trauma centers
The burden of disease of hearing disorders among adults is high, but a significant part goes undetected. Screening programs in combination with the delivery of hearing aids can alleviate this situation, but the economic attractiveness of such programs is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the population-level costs, effects and cost-effectiveness of alternative delivering hearing aids models in Tamil Nadu, India
In an observational study design, we estimated total costs and effects of two active screening programs in the community in combination with the provision of hearing aids at secondary care level, and the costs and effects of the provision of hearing aids at tertiary care level. Screening and hearing aid delivery costs were estimated on the basis of program records and an empirical assessment of health personnel time input. Household costs for seeking and undergoing hearing health care were collected with a questionnaire (see Additional file 2). Health effects were estimated on the basis of compliance with the hearing aid, and associated changes in disability, and were expressed in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted.
Active screening and provision of hearing aids at the secondary care level costs around Rs.7,000 (US$152) per patient, whereas provision of hearing aids at the tertiary care level costs Rs 5,693 (US$122) per patient. The cost per DALY averted was around RS 42,200 (US$900) at secondary care level and Rs 33,900 (US$720) at tertiary care level. The majority of people did consult other providers before being screened in the community. Costs of food and transport ranged between Rs. 2 (US$0,04) and Rs. 39 (US$0,83).
Active screening and provision of hearing aids at the secondary care level is slightly more costly than passive screening and fitting of hearing aids at the tertiary care level, but seems also able to reach a higher coverage of hearing aids services. Although crude estimates indicate that both passive and active screening programs can be cautiously considered as cost-effective according to international thresholds, important questions remain regarding the implementation of the latter.
Objective To compare the effect of an invitation promoting informed choice for screening with a standard invitation on attendance and motivation to engage in preventive action.
Design Randomised controlled trial.
Setting Four English general practices.
Participants 1272 people aged 40-69 years, at risk for diabetes, identified from practice registers using a validated risk score and invited to attend for screening.
Intervention Intervention was a previously validated invitation to inform the decision to attend screening, presenting diabetes as a serious potential problem, and providing details of possible costs and benefits of screening and treatment in text and pie charts. This was compared with a brief, standard invitation simply describing diabetes as a serious potential problem.
Main outcome measures The primary end point was attendance for screening. The secondary outcome measures were intention to make changes to lifestyle and satisfaction with decisions made among attenders.
Results The primary end point was analysed for all 1272 participants. 55.8% (353/633) of those in the informed choice group attended for screening, compared with 57.6% (368/639) in the standard invitation group (mean difference −1.8%, 95% confidence interval −7.3% to 3.6%; P=0.51). Attendance was lower among the more deprived group (most deprived third 47.5% v least deprived third 64.3%; P<0.001). Interaction between deprivation and effect of invitation type on attendance was not significant. Among attenders, intention to change behaviour was strong and unaffected by invitation type.
Conclusions Providing information to support choice did not adversely affect attendance for screening for diabetes. Those from more socially deprived groups were, however, less likely to attend, regardless of the type of invitation received. Further attention to invitation content alone is unlikely to achieve equity in uptake of preventive services.
Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 73125647.
There is a wealth of evidence regarding the detrimental impact of excessive alcohol consumption on the physical, psychological and social health of the population. There also exists a substantial evidence base for the efficacy of brief interventions aimed at reducing alcohol consumption across a range of healthcare settings. Primary research conducted in emergency departments has reinforced the current evidence regarding the potential effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Within this body of evidence there is marked variation in the intensity of brief intervention delivered, from very minimal interventions to more intensive behavioural or lifestyle counselling approaches. Further the majority of primary research has been conducted in single centre and there is little evidence of the wider issues of generalisability and implementation of brief interventions across emergency departments.
The study design is a prospective pragmatic factorial cluster randomised controlled trial. Individual Emergency Departments (ED) (n = 9) are randomised with equal probability to a combination of screening tool (M-SASQ vs FAST vs SIPS-PAT) and an intervention (Minimal intervention vs Brief advice vs Brief lifestyle counselling). The primary hypothesis is that brief lifestyle counselling delivered by an Alcohol Health Worker (AHW) is more effective than Brief Advice or a minimal intervention delivered by ED staff. Secondary hypotheses address whether short screening instruments are more acceptable and as efficient as longer screening instruments and the cost-effectiveness of screening and brief interventions in ED. Individual participants will be followed up at 6 and 12 months after consent. The primary outcome measure is performance using a gold-standard screening test (AUDIT). Secondary outcomes include; quantity and frequency of alcohol consumed, alcohol-related problems, motivation to change, health related quality of life and service utilisation.
This paper presents a protocol for a large multi-centre pragmatic factorial cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening and brief interventions for hazardous alcohol users attending emergency departments.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate and evaluate published data on cost effectiveness of cholesterol lowering interventions, and how this information could be interpreted in a rational approach of cholesterol management in general practice. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature. SETTING: No restriction on setting. MATERIALS: Papers reporting on the cost effectiveness or cost utility of prevention of (recurrent) coronary heart disease by reduction of hypercholesterolaemia in adults. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty nine studies, most cost effectiveness analyses, were included. In 24 studies drug interventions only were analysed. Costs of screening to target cholesterol lowering interventions to persons with hypercholesterolaemia were considered in nine studies. Adjustments of the efficacy of the intervention for community effectiveness were described in seven studies. In four studies life years gained were adjusted for quality of life. Despite large variation in the outcomes, there is a constant tendency towards a less favourable cost effectiveness ratio for intervening in persons without coronary heart disease compared with persons with coronary heart disease and for women compared with men. CONCLUSIONS: There is lack of data on cost effectiveness of cholesterol lowering interventions in the general practice setting. The cost effectiveness of cholesterol lowering in general practice deteriorates when all relevant costs are taken into account and when efficacy is corrected for community effectiveness. Cholesterol lowering intervention is more cost effective in men compared with women and in patients with coronary heart disease compared with persons without coronary heart disease. Considerations from cost effectiveness analyses should be incorporated into the development and implementation of national cholesterol guidelines for general practitioners. Standardisation of cost effectiveness studies is important for future economic evaluations.
Patient activation can improve health outcomes for chronic diseases that disproportionately affect the elderly. The present study evaluated the impact of an activation intervention delivered in community senior centers.
One hundred and sixteen senior participants.
Two Los Angeles community senior centers.
Participants were invited to attend group screenings of video programs intended to inform and motivate self-management of chronic conditions common among seniors. Screenings were followed by moderated discussions reinforcing active patient participation in chronic disease management. Screenings were scheduled over the course of 12 weeks.
Design and Measures
One center was assigned by coin-toss to an encouragement condition, in which participants received a $50 gift card if they attended at least 3 group screenings. Participants in the non-encouraged center received no incentive for attendance. Validated study measures for patient activation, physical activity and health-related quality of life were completed at baseline, 12 weeks and 6 months following enrollment.
Participants attending the encouraged senior center were more likely to attend 3 or more group screenings (77.8% vs. 47.2%, p=.001). At 6-month follow-up, participants from either center who attended 3 or more group screenings (n=74, 64%) reported significantly greater activation (p=.000), more minutes walking (p=.000) and engaging in vigorous physical activity (p=.006) and better health-related quality of life (SF-12 MCS: p=.000; SF-12 PCS: p=.002).
Delivering this pilot intervention in community senior centers is a potentially promising approach to activate seniors that warrants further investigation for improving chronic disease outcomes.
Chronic diseases; patient activation; self-management
Lifestyle risk factors, in particular smoking, nutrition, alcohol consumption and physical inactivity (SNAP) are the main behavioural risk factors for chronic disease. Primary health care (PHC) has been shown to be an effective setting to address lifestyle risk factors at the individual level. However much of the focus of research to date has been in general practice. Relatively little attention has been paid to the role of nurses working in the PHC setting. Community health nurses are well placed to provide lifestyle intervention as they often see clients in their own homes over an extended period of time, providing the opportunity to offer intervention and enhance motivation through repeated contacts. The overall aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of a brief lifestyle intervention delivered by community nurses in routine practice on changes in clients' SNAP risk factors.
The trial uses a quasi-experimental design involving four generalist community nursing services in NSW Australia. Services have been randomly allocated to an 'early intervention' group or 'late intervention' (comparison) group. 'Early intervention' sites are provided with training and support for nurses in identifying and offering brief lifestyle intervention for clients during routine consultations. 'Late intervention site' provide usual care and will be offered the study intervention following the final data collection point. A total of 720 generalist community nursing clients will be recruited at the time of referral from participating sites. Data collection consists of 1) telephone surveys with clients at baseline, three months and six months to examine change in SNAP risk factors and readiness to change 2) nurse survey at baseline, six and 12 months to examine changes in nurse confidence, attitudes and practices in the assessment and management of SNAP risk factors 3) semi-structured interviews/focus with nurses, managers and clients in 'early intervention' sites to explore the feasibility, acceptability and sustainability of the intervention.
The study will provide evidence about the effectiveness and feasibility of brief lifestyle interventions delivered by generalist community nurses as part of routine practice. This will inform future community nursing practice and PHC policy.
Although the percentage of women who initiate breast cancer screening is rising, the rate of continued adherence is poor. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored print intervention compared with a non-tailored print intervention for increasing the breast cancer screening rate among a non-adherent population.
In total, 1859 participants aged 51–59 years (except those aged 55 years) were recruited from a Japanese urban community setting. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either a tailored print reminder (tailored intervention group) or non-tailored print reminder (non-tailored intervention group). The primary outcome was improvement in the breast cancer screening rate. The screening rates and cost-effectiveness were examined for each treatment group (tailored vs. non-tailored) and each intervention subgroup during a follow-up period of five months. All analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle.
The number of women who underwent a screening mammogram following the reminder was 277 (19.9%) in the tailored reminder group and 27 (5.8%) in the non-tailored reminder group. A logistic regression model revealed that the odds of a woman who received a tailored print reminder undergoing mammography was 4.02 times those of a women who had received a non-tailored print reminder (95% confidence interval, 2.67–6.06). The cost of one mammography screening increase was 2,544 JPY or 30 USD in the tailored intervention group and 4,366 JPY or 52 USD in the non-tailored intervention group.
Providing a tailored print reminder was an effective and cost-effective strategy for improving breast cancer screening rates among non-adherent women.
Mammography; Tailored intervention; Cancer worry; Cost-effectiveness; Non-adherent population
Background. Women over 70 with breast cancer have poorer one-year survival and present at a more advanced stage than younger women. Promoting early symptomatic presentation in older women may reduce stage cost effectively and is unlikely to lead to overdiagnosis. After examining efficacy in a randomised controlled trial, we piloted a brief health professional-delivered intervention to equip women to present promptly with breast symptoms, as an integral part of the final invited mammogram at age ~70, in the English National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Methods. We trained mammographers, who then offered the intervention to older women in four breast screening services. We examined breast cancer awareness at baseline and one month in women receiving the intervention, and also in a service where the intervention was not offered. Results. We trained 27 mammographers to deliver the intervention confidently to a high standard. Breast cancer awareness increased 7-fold at one month in women receiving the intervention compared with 2-fold in the comparison service (odds ratio 15.2, 95% confidence interval 10.0 to 23.2). Conclusions. The PEP Intervention can be implemented in routine clinical practice with a potency similar to that achieved in a randomised controlled trial. It has the potential to reduce delay in diagnosis for breast cancer in older women.
Lifestyle interventions (i.e., diet and/or physical activity) are effective in delaying or preventing the onset of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. However, policymakers must know the cost-effectiveness of such interventions before implementing them at the large-scale population level. This review discusses various issues (e.g., characteristics, modeling, and long-term effectiveness) in the economic evaluation of lifestyle interventions for the primary and secondary prevention of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The diverse nature of lifestyle interventions, i.e., type of intervention, means of provision, target groups, setting, and methodology, are the main obstacles to comparing evaluation results. However, most lifestyle interventions are among the intervention options usually regarded as cost-effective. Diabetes prevention programs, such as interventions starting with targeted or universal screening, childhood obesity prevention, and community-based interventions, have reported favorable cost-effectiveness ratios.
lifestyle interventions; economic evaluation; Markov model; long-term effectiveness; primary prevention; secondary prevention; diabetes; cardiovascular disease; cost-effectiveness
Introduction: Visits to settings such as emergency departments (EDs) may present a “teachable moment” in that a patient may be more open to feedback and suggestions regarding their risky alcohol and illicit drug-use behaviors. Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an 'opportunistic' public health approach that targets low-risk users, in addition to those already dependent on alcohol and/or drugs. SBIRT programs provide patients with comprehensive screening and assessments, and deliver interventions of appropriate intensity to reduce risks related to alcohol and drug use.
Methods: This study used a single group pre-post test design to assess the effect of the California SBIRT service program (i.e., CASBIRT) on 6 substance-use outcomes (past-month prevalence and number of days of binge drinking, illegal drug use, and marijuana use). Trained bilingual/bicultural Health Educators attempted to screen all adult patients in 12 EDs/trauma centers (regardless of the reason for the patient's visit) using a short instrument, and then delivered a brief motivational intervention matched to the patient's risk level. A total of 2,436 randomly selected patients who screened positive for alcohol and/or drug use consented to be in a 6-month telephone follow-up interview. Because of the high loss to follow-up rate, we used an intention-to-treat approach for the data analysis.
Results: Results of generalized linear mixed models showed modest reductions in all 6 drug-and alcohol-use outcomes. Men (versus women), those at relatively higher risk status (versus lower risk), and those with only one substance of misuse (versus both alcohol and illicit drug misuse) tended to show more positive change.
Conclusion: These results suggest that SBIRT services provided in acute care settings are associated with modest changes in self-reported recent alcohol and illicit drug use.
Mitigating the unequal burden of cancer often involves conducting community-based trials to develop effective intervention strategies to promote cancer-related health behaviors. However, this is challenging due to the simultaneous influence of numerous factors, at multiple levels in the socio-ecological context, on health behavior. A sound conceptual framework can bring order to this complex environment and provide a roadmap for systematically addressing the multiple determinants of the behavior in question. This paper describes the application of The Health Behavior Framework, an integrative conceptual model, in an ongoing Program Project, “Liver Cancer Control Interventions for Asian-Americans.” The Framework has been integral to shaping all aspects of the three component research trials from selection of the study designs to development of the interventions and data collection instruments. We advocate universal adoption of theory into community-based intervention research as a way to accelerate our ability to develop effective interventions and facilitate synthesis of study results across populations and behavioral outcomes: critical steps in advancing the field of health disparities research.
Hepatitis B virus; Liver cancer; Cancer prevention; Theory; Community-based Intervention; Health behavior; Disparities; Asians; Ethnic minorities; Cancer screening; Conceptual model
Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality. Screening can be effective but is underutilized. System- or multi-level interventions could be effective at increasing screening, but most have been implemented and evaluated in higher-resource settings such as health maintenance organizations. Given the disparities evident for colorectal cancer and the potential for screening to improve outcomes, there is a need to expand this work to include diverse settings, including those who treat economically disadvantaged patients. This paper describes the study protocol for a trial designed to increase colorectal cancer screening in those ‘safety-net’ health centers that serve underinsured and uninsured patients. This trial was designed and is being implemented using a community-based participatory approach.
We developed a practical clinical cluster-randomized controlled trial. We will recruit 16 community health centers to this trial. This systems-level intervention consists of a menu of evidence-based implementation strategies for increasing colorectal cancer screening. Health centers in the intervention arm then collaborate with the study team to tailor strategies to their own setting in order to maximize fit and acceptability. Data are collected at the organizational level through interviews, and at the provider and patient levels through surveys. Patients complete a survey about their healthcare and screening utilization at baseline, six months, and twelve months.
The primary outcome is colorectal cancer screening by patient self-report, supplemented by a chart-audit in a subsample of patients. Implementation outcomes informed by the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) conceptual framework will be measured at patient, provider, and practice levels.
Our study is one of the first to integrate community participatory strategies to a randomized controlled trial in a healthcare setting. The multi-level approach will support the ability of the intervention to affect screening through multiple avenues. The participatory approach will strengthen the chance that implementation strategies will be maintained after study completion and, supports external validity by increasing health center interest and willingness to participate.
Colon cancer; Healthcare disparities; Screening; Randomized controlled trial; Intervention studies; Multi-level intervention; Implementation strategy; Community-based participatory research