Matching Items (2)

Filtering by

Clear all filters

126911-Thumbnail Image.png

Access to Healthcare Among Those Experiencing Homelessness: A Depression Screening Project

Description

Homeless individuals encounter barriers such as lack of health insurance, increased cost of care and unavailability of resources. They have increased risk of comorbid physical disease and poor mental health.

Homeless individuals encounter barriers such as lack of health insurance, increased cost of care and unavailability of resources. They have increased risk of comorbid physical disease and poor mental health. Depression is a prevalent mental health disorder in the US linked to increased risk of mortality. Literature suggests depression screening can identify high-risk individuals with using the patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9).

The objective of this project is to determine if screening identifies depression in the homeless and how it impacts healthcare access. Setting is a local organization in Phoenix offering shelter to homeless individuals. An evidence-based project was implemented over two months in 2019 using convenience sampling. Intervention included depression screening using the PHQ-9, referring to primary care and tracking appointment times. IRB approval obtained from Arizona State University, privacy discussed, and consent obtained prior to data collection. Participants were assigned a random number to protect privacy.

A chart audit tool was used to obtain sociodemographics and insurance status. Descriptive statistics used and analyzed using Intellectus. Sample size was (n = 18), age (M = 35) most were White-non-Hispanic, 44% had a high school diploma and 78% were insured. Mean score was 7.72, three were previously diagnosed and not referred. Three were referred with a turnaround appointment time of one, two and seven days respectively. No significant correlation found between age and depression severity. A significant correlation found between previous diagnosis and depression severity. Attention to PHQ-9 varied among providers and not always addressed. Future projects should focus on improving collaboration between this facility and providers, increasing screening and ensuring adequate follow up and treatment.

Contributors

Agent

Created

Date Created
  • 2020-05-04

578-Thumbnail Image.png

Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Primary Care Setting

Description

Purpose: The purpose of this project was to implement a change in workflow to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and improve Meaningful Use scores in a primary care

Purpose: The purpose of this project was to implement a change in workflow to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and improve Meaningful Use scores in a primary care setting.

Background and Significance: CRC is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States among men and women. Current CRC screening rates remain low, even with advanced screening options available. Meaningful Use sets specific objectives for health care providers to achieve. Documenting CRC screening status and recommending CRC screenings to patients is one of the objectives of Meaningful Use and is considered a Clinical Quality Measure (HealthIT.gov). Factors that lead to CRC screening include primary care providers (PCPs) raising the topic, involving support staff, involving patients in the decision-making process, and setting alerts in electronic health records (EHRs).

Methods: The Health Belief Model and Ottawa Model of Research Use helped guide this project. The project took place at a private primary care practice. The focus was on patients between the ages of 50 and 75 years old meeting criteria for CRC. Five PCPS and five medical assistants (MAs) chose to participate in the study. Participants were given pre and post Practice Culture Assessment (PCA) surveys to measure perceptions of the practice culture. The project included a three-part practice change: PCP and MA education about CRC screening guidelines, EHR documentation and reminders, and a change of patient visit workflow which included having MAs review patient's CRC screening status before they were seen by the PCP and handing out CRC screening brochures when appropriate. PCPs then ordered the appropriate CRC screening, and the MA documented the screening in the EHR under a designated location. CRC Screening Project Evaluation Forms were completed by MAs after each patient visit.

Outcomes: No significant difference from pre to post survey satisfaction scores were found (t (8) = - 1.542, p= = .162). Means of quantitative data were reported from the CRC screening evaluation forms; N=91. The most common method of screening chosen was colonoscopy, 87%. A strong correlation was found (r (-.293) = .01, p<.05) between receiving a CRC brochure and choosing a form of screening. Meaningful Use scores pre and post project are pending.

Conclusion: Patients are more likely to choose a screening method when the topic is raised in a primary care setting. Continued staff education on workflow is important to sustain this change. Further research is needed to evaluate cost effectiveness and sustainability of this practice change.

Contributors

Agent

Created

Date Created
  • 2018-05-05