Dataset Information

Hazardous Drinking Interventions Delivered During Medical-Surgical Care: Patient and Provider Views.

ABSTRACT: Addressing hazardous drinking during medical-surgical care improves patients' health. This formative evaluation examined patients' consideration of options to change drinking and engage in treatment. It explored whether interventions such as "DO-MoST" overcome treatment barriers. We interviewed 20 medical-surgical patients with hazardous drinking in a trial of DO-MoST, and 16 providers. Analyses used a directed content approach. Patients were receptive to and comfortable discussing drinking during medical-surgical care. Interventions like DO-MoST (patient-centered, motivational approach to shared decision making) addressed some treatment barriers. Patients and providers viewed such interventions as helpful by building a relationship with a psychologist who facilitated self-awareness of drinking behaviors, and discussing connections between alcohol- and physical health-related problems and potential strategies to address drinking. However, both groups expressed concerns about individual and system-level barriers to long-term change. Interventions like DO-MoST bridge the gap between the patient's medical treatment episode and transition to other health care settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03258632).

SUBMITTER: Timko C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10035972 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hazardous Drinking Interventions Delivered During Medical-Surgical Care: Patient and Provider Views.

Timko Christine C Lewis Mandy M Lor Mai Chee MC Aldaco-Revilla Laura L Blonigen Daniel D Ilgen Mark M

Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings 20230323 1

Addressing hazardous drinking during medical-surgical care improves patients' health. This formative evaluation examined patients' consideration of options to change drinking and engage in treatment. It explored whether interventions such as "DO-MoST" overcome treatment barriers. We interviewed 20 medical-surgical patients with hazardous drinking in a trial of DO-MoST, and 16 providers. Analyses used a directed content approach. Patients were receptive to and comfortable discussing drinking duri ...[more]

PMID: 36959430

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) found a reduction in lung cancer mortality among participants screened with low-dose computed tomography vs chest radiography. In February 2015, Medicare announced its decision to cover annual lung screening for patients with a significant smoking history. These guidelines promote smoking cessation treatment as an adjunct to screening, but the frequency and effectiveness of clinician-delivered smoking cessation interventions delivered after lung screening are unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the association between the reported clinician-delivered 5As (ask, advise, assess, assist [talk about quitting or recommend stop-smoking medications or recommend counseling], and arrange follow-up) after lung screening and smoking behavior changes.Design, setting, and participantsA matched case-control study (cases were quitters and controls were continued smokers) of 3336 NLST participants who were smokers at enrollment examined participants' rates and patterns of 5A delivery after a lung screen and reported smoking cessation behaviors.Main outcomes and measuresPrevalence of the clinician-delivered 5As and associated smoking cessation after lung screening.ResultsDelivery of the 5As 1 year after screening were as follows: ask, 77.2%; advise, 75.6%; assess, 63.4%; assist, 56.4%; and arrange follow-up, 10.4%. Receipt of ask, advise, and assess was not significantly associated with quitting in multivariate models that adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, medical history, screening results, nicotine dependence, and motivation to quit. Assist was associated with a 40% increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.21-1.63), and arrange was associated with a 46% increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.19-1.79).Conclusions and relevanceAssist and arrange follow-up delivered by primary care providers to smokers who were participating in the NLST were associated with increased quitting; less intensive interventions (ask, advise, and assess) were not. However, rates of assist and arrange follow-up were relatively low. Our findings confirm the need for and benefit of clinicians taking more active intervention steps in helping patients who undergo screening to quit smoking.

Project description:PurposeBehavioral interventions to reduce hazardous drinking are only moderately successful in promoting sustained behavior change and post-intervention effect sizes among adolescents remain modest. This study aimed to explore a relevant therapeutic active ingredient, adolescent:provider alliance, as a moderator of short-term (3 month) adolescent intervention outcomes within the course of a larger parent randomized control trial (RCT).MethodsParticipants were community-based youth engaged in hazardous drinking (N = 168) who were randomized to 2 sessions of either motivational interviewing (MI) or mindfulness (brief adolescent mindfulness; BAM). Youth reported pre-intervention hazardous drinking at baseline and rated therapeutic alliance (a metric of adolescent:provider "connectedness" that helps facilitate working relationships during interventions) immediately post-intervention; they reported hazardous drinking again at 3 months post-intervention. Negative binomial regressions predicted post-intervention hazardous drinking score from adolescent:provider alliance, intervention condition, and their interaction.ResultsMean hazardous drinking was reduced by 34-40 % across both intervention conditions, with no significant between-condition differences. Stronger adolescent:provider alliance was associated with lower hazardous drinking scores at 3 months, but this effect was attenuated after controlling for baseline hazardous drinking. Contrary to predictions, adolescent:provider alliance did not appear to moderate the effect of intervention condition in this sample of young people engaged in hazardous drinking.ConclusionsConsistent with prior literature, baseline hazardous drinking was a robust predictor of treatment outcomes. At the same time, these results suggest that future work may benefit from continuing to examine and disaggregate the nature of adolescent:provider alliance across the spectrum of empirically supported brief interventions for adolescent hazardous drinking.Clinical trials registration numberClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03367858. Data Sharing Statement: Requests for deidentified individual participant data can be made to the first author.

Project description:Background. A culture of stringent drug policy, one-size-fits-all treatment approaches, and drug-related stigma has clouded clinical HIV practice in the United States. The result is a series of missed opportunities in the HIV care environment. An approach which may address the broken relationship between patient and provider is harm reduction-which removes judgment and operates at the patient's stage of readiness. Harm reduction is not a routine part of care; rather, it exists outside clinic walls, exacerbating the divide between compassionate, stigma-free services and the medical system. Methods. Qualitative, phenomenological, semi-structured, individual interviews with patients and providers were conducted in three publicly-funded clinics in Chicago, located in areas of high HIV prevalence and drug use and serving African-American patients (N = 38). A deductive thematic analysis guided the process, including: the creation of an index code list, transcription and verification of interviews, manual coding, notation of emerging themes and refinement of code definitions, two more rounds of coding within AtlasTi, calculation of Cohen's Kappa for interrater reliability, queries of major codes and analysis of additional common themes. Results. Thematic analysis of findings indicated that the majority of patients felt receptive to harm reduction interventions (safer injection counseling, safer stimulant use counseling, overdose prevention information, supply provision) from their provider, and expressed anticipated gratitude for harm reduction information and/or supplies within the HIV care visit, although some were reluctant to talk openly about their drug use. Provider results were mixed, with more receptivity reported by advanced practice nurses, and more barriers cited by physicians. Notable barriers included: role-perceptions, limited time, inadequate training, and the patients themselves. Discussion. Patients are willing to receive harm reduction interventions from their HIV care providers, while provider receptiveness is mixed. The findings reveal critical implications for diffusion of harm reduction into HIV care, including the need to address cited barriers for both patients and providers to ensure feasibility of implementation. Strategies to address these barriers are discussed, and recommendations for further research are also shared.

Project description:ObjectiveNational Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend that patients with ovarian cancer receive surgical care from a gynecologic oncologist. However, 15%-30% of patients with ovarian cancer do not receive surgical care from this specialist. The reasons for this remain unknown. We aim at assessing the barriers and attitudes perceived by patients with ovarian cancer who did not receive their primary surgery from a gynecologic oncologist and by diagnosing providers in an exploratory qualitative study.Materials and methodsPatients and providers were sampled through the Iowa Cancer Registry. Participants were interviewed by telephone about barriers that patients face receiving surgical care from a specialist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was completed by two team members.FindingsProviders (n = 10, 13% participation rate) identified many system-level barriers, including poor provider-to-provider communication, long time-to-surgery wait times, and a limited number of gynecologic oncologists working in their referral range. Patients (n = 16, 38% participation rate) denied system-level barriers; however, no patients reported receiving a referral to a gynecologic oncologist. This, in and of itself, constitutes a system-level barrier. Providers identified many barriers that their patients face, whereas patients failed to identify these barriers and denied facing them. Patients described the shock that they experienced after diagnosis and its limitations on their decision-making process. Both providers and patients agreed that the providers were influential in determining care decisions.DiscussionThere is a divergence in the perceptions of barriers to care between providers and patients. Open discussions are needed about options and clinical guidelines for surgical ovarian cancer care. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate mechanisms to improve provider-to-patient discussions about surgical recommendations.

Dataset Information

Hazardous Drinking Interventions Delivered During Medical-Surgical Care: Patient and Provider Views.

Publications

Hazardous Drinking Interventions Delivered During Medical-Surgical Care: Patient and Provider Views.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets