Matching Items (4)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

600-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Children with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at increased risk for psychosocial issues (PSI), decreased quality of life (QOL), and decreased resilience. The purpose of this project was to implement a screening protocol for PSI, QOL, and resilience, with appropriate psychosocial referral for children with CHD.

A pilot protocol was implemented

Children with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at increased risk for psychosocial issues (PSI), decreased quality of life (QOL), and decreased resilience. The purpose of this project was to implement a screening protocol for PSI, QOL, and resilience, with appropriate psychosocial referral for children with CHD.

A pilot protocol was implemented to screen children with CHD, aged 8-17 years, and parents, for resilience, QOL, and PSI. Referrals for psychosocial services were made for 84.2% of children screened (n = 16) based on scoring outcomes. Statistically significant differences in the parents and children’s resilience mean scores were noted. Higher parental scores may indicate that parents believe their children are more resilient than the children perceive themselves to be.
Early identification of concerns regarding QOL, resilience, and PSI in children with CHD can provide ongoing surveillance, while affording opportunities for improved communication between providers, parents, and children. Routine screening and longitudinal follow-up is recommended.

ContributorsBonowski, Kelley (Author) / Jacobson, Diana (Thesis advisor) / Zangwill, Steven (Thesis advisor) / Espinoza, Jennifer (Thesis advisor)
Created2018-04-30
560-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Children often present to the emergency department (ED) for treatment of abuse-related injuries. ED healthcare providers (HCPs) do not consistently screen children for physical abuse, which may allow abuse to go undetected and increases the risk for re-injury and death. ED HCPs frequently cite lack of knowledge or confidence in

Children often present to the emergency department (ED) for treatment of abuse-related injuries. ED healthcare providers (HCPs) do not consistently screen children for physical abuse, which may allow abuse to go undetected and increases the risk for re-injury and death. ED HCPs frequently cite lack of knowledge or confidence in screening for and detecting child physical abuse.

The purpose of this evidence-based quality improvement project was to implement a comprehensive screening program that included ED HCP education on child physical abuse, a systematic screening protocol, and use of the validated Escape Instrument. After a 20-minute educational session, there was a significant increase in ED HCP knowledge and confidence scores for child physical abuse screening and recognition (p < .001). There was no difference in diagnostic coding of child physical abuse by ED HCPs when evaluating a 30-day period before and after implementation of the screening protocol.

In a follow-up survey, the Escape Instrument and educational session were the most reported screening facilitators, while transition to a new electronic health system was the most reported barrier. The results of this project support comprehensive ED screening programs as a method of improving HCP knowledge and confidence in screening for and recognizing child physical abuse. Future research should focus on the impact of screening on the diagnosis and treatment of child physical abuse. Efforts should also be made to standardize child abuse screening programs throughout all EDs, with the potential for spread to other settings.

ContributorsCarson, Sheri C. (Author) / Hagler, Debra (Thesis advisor)
Created2018-04-09
609-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Background: The cost of substance use (SU) in the United States (U.S.) is estimated at $1.25 trillion annually. SU is a worldwide health concern, impacting physical and psychological health of those who use substances, their friends, family members, communities and nations. Screening, Brief Intervention (BI) and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT)

Background: The cost of substance use (SU) in the United States (U.S.) is estimated at $1.25 trillion annually. SU is a worldwide health concern, impacting physical and psychological health of those who use substances, their friends, family members, communities and nations. Screening, Brief Intervention (BI) and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) provides an evidence-based (EB) framework to detect and treat SU. Evidence shows that mental health (MH) providers are not providing EB SU management. Federally grant-funded SBIRT demonstrated evidence of decreased SU and prevention of full disorders. Implementation outcomes in smaller-scale projects have included increased clinician knowledge, documentation and interdisciplinary teamwork.

Objective: To improve quality of care (QOC) for adolescents who use substances in the inpatient psychiatric setting by implementing EB SBIRT practices.

Methods: Research questions focused on whether the number of SBIRT notes documented (N=170 charts) increased and whether training of the interdisciplinary team (N=26 clinicians) increased SBIRT knowledge. Individualized interventions used existing processes, training and a new SBIRT Note template. An SBIRT knowledge survey was adapted from a similar study. A pre-and post-chart audit was conducted to show increase in SBIRT documentation. The rationale for the latter was not only for compliance, but also so that all team members can know the status of SBIRT services. Thus, increased interdisciplinary teamwork was an intentional, though indirect, outcome.

Results: A paired-samples t-test indicated clinician SBIRT knowledge significantly increased, with a large effect size. The results suggest that a short, 45-60-minute tailored education module can significantly increase clinician SBIRT knowledge. Auditing screening & BI notes both before and after the study period yielded important patient SU information and which types of SBIRT documentation increased post-implementation. The CRAFFT scores of the patients were quite high from a SU perspective, averaging over 3/6 both pre- and post-implementation, revealing over an 80% chance that the adolescent patient had a SU disorder. Most patients were positive for at least one substance (pre- = 47.1%; post- = 65.2%), with cannabis and alcohol being the most commonly used substances. Completed CRAFFT screenings increased from 62.5% to 72.7% of audited patients. Post-implementation, there were two types of BI notes: the preexisting Progress Note BI (PN BI) and the new Auto-Text BI (AT BI), part of the new SBIRT Note template introduced during implementation. The PN BIs not completed despite a positive screen increased from 79.6% to 83.7%. PN BIs increased 1%. The option for AT BI notes ameliorated this effect. Total BI notes completed for a patient positive for a substance increased from 20.4% to 32.6%, with 67.4% not receiving a documented BI. Total BIs completed for all patients was 21.2% post-implementation.

Conclusion: This project is scalable throughout the U.S. in MH settings and will provide crucial knowledge about positive and negative drivers in small-scale SBIRT implementations. The role of registered nurses (RNs), social workers and psychiatrists in providing SBIRT services as an interdisciplinary team will be enhanced. Likely conclusions are that short trainings can significantly increase clinician knowledge about SBIRT and compliance with standards. Consistent with prior evidence, significant management involvement, SBIRT champions, thought leaders and other consistent emphasis is necessary to continue improving SBIRT practice in the target setting.

Keywords: adolescents, teenagers, youth, alcohol, behavioral health, cannabis, crisis, documentation, drug use, epidemic, high-risk use, illicit drugs, implementation, mental health, opiates, opioid, pilot study, psychiatric inpatient hospital, quality improvement, SBIRT, Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment, substance use, unhealthy alcohol use, use disorders

ContributorsMaixner, Roberta (Author) / Guthery, Ann (Thesis advisor) / Mensik, Jennifer (Thesis advisor) / Uriri-Glover, Johannah (Thesis advisor)
Created2019-05-02
186403-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Purpose/Background: Children exposed to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and toxic stress have an increased risk of developing chronic illness and early death in the absence of protective factors. Many providers feel inadequately prepared to screen for and treat ACEs. This quality improvement project, based on the Health

Purpose/Background: Children exposed to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and toxic stress have an increased risk of developing chronic illness and early death in the absence of protective factors. Many providers feel inadequately prepared to screen for and treat ACEs. This quality improvement project, based on the Health Belief Model, investigated if providing ACEs education before a screening program is effective in improving attitudes, knowledge, and the number of completed screenings. Method: The project was conducted at a pediatric primary care practice in the southwestern United States. All providers voluntarily consented to attend four education sessions: 1) Trauma overview, 2) Trauma physiology, 3) Trauma-informed care, 4) Screening tool/referral process. An anonymous pre/post-education Likert-Scale survey was completed to assess knowledge and attitudes about ACEs and screening. The number of completed ACEs screening tools and referrals made were collected four- and eight-weeks post-implementation. Results: Data were analyzed using Intellectus Statistics SoftwareTM. There was a significant increase in ACEs knowledge from the pre-test (p= .011, ?=.05). There was not a significant change in attitudes from the pre-test (p=.066, ?=.05). However, the mean pre- to post-survey scores increased for both categories, indicating improved attitudes. Over the first four weeks, 75% of eligible children were screened and 6% were referred to an ACEs resource program. In the second four weeks, 56% of children were screened and 8.6% were referred. Discussion: A comprehensive education program for providers can improve knowledge about ACEs screening, leading to improved screening practices, early identification, and the introduction of protective resources.
Created2022-04-29