Journal of substance use and addiction treatment · 2025
Improving alcohol-related care in small-medium primary care practices: An evaluation of an adaptation of the SPARC trial intervention for small-medium sized practices.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hamilton Leah K, Lapham Gwen T, Day Anya, Black-Watson Mariah, Bishop Dawn, Parsons Darla, Budimir Cheryl A, Baulckim La'Tia, Lee Amy K, Addis Megan, Bradley Katharine A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-Related Care (SPARC) trial demonstrated that 6 months of practice facilitation, decision support in electronic health records (EHRs) and performance feedback, increased identification and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) in primary care (PC). The Michigan SPARC (MI-SPARC) study tested an adaptation of SPARC for small-medium PC practices.
METHODS: PC practices were recruited for and participated in alcohol-related quality improvement (2/2020-2/2023). Outcomes collected for quality improvement were used for this evaluation, with data collected manually ("manual practices") or electronically ("electronic practices"). The prevalence of EHR-documented brief intervention (BI) and AUD medication treatment (primary outcomes), and alcohol screening and AUD diagnosis (secondary outcomes) were measured at baseline and 6-months. Secondary data from formative evaluation and practice surveys were analyzed using PRISM domains: external environment, recipients, implementation infrastructure, and intervention.
RESULTS: 25 practices enrolled; 14 completed data collection. Neither primary outcome was consistently monitored or collected by practices. Mean prevalence of documented screening increased from 20 % to 55 % (manual practices) and from 3 % to 20 % (electronic practices). The mean prevalences of documented AUD diagnosis at baseline and follow-up, were 1.4 % and 3.8 % (manual) and 0.1 % and 0.05 % (electronic). At follow-up, 12 practices reported screening with validated questionnaires, and 13 and 8 offering BI and AUD medications respectively. Barriers identified were low resources, small PC teams, low EHR functionality, intervention complexity, stigma, and COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: Despite adaptions for smaller PC practices and improvements in screening, MI-SPARC did not increase documented BI or AUD medication treatment, largely reflecting mismatch between intervention complexity and implementation infrastructure in PC practices.
METHODS: PC practices were recruited for and participated in alcohol-related quality improvement (2/2020-2/2023). Outcomes collected for quality improvement were used for this evaluation, with data collected manually ("manual practices") or electronically ("electronic practices"). The prevalence of EHR-documented brief intervention (BI) and AUD medication treatment (primary outcomes), and alcohol screening and AUD diagnosis (secondary outcomes) were measured at baseline and 6-months. Secondary data from formative evaluation and practice surveys were analyzed using PRISM domains: external environment, recipients, implementation infrastructure, and intervention.
RESULTS: 25 practices enrolled; 14 completed data collection. Neither primary outcome was consistently monitored or collected by practices. Mean prevalence of documented screening increased from 20 % to 55 % (manual practices) and from 3 % to 20 % (electronic practices). The mean prevalences of documented AUD diagnosis at baseline and follow-up, were 1.4 % and 3.8 % (manual) and 0.1 % and 0.05 % (electronic). At follow-up, 12 practices reported screening with validated questionnaires, and 13 and 8 offering BI and AUD medications respectively. Barriers identified were low resources, small PC teams, low EHR functionality, intervention complexity, stigma, and COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: Despite adaptions for smaller PC practices and improvements in screening, MI-SPARC did not increase documented BI or AUD medication treatment, largely reflecting mismatch between intervention complexity and implementation infrastructure in PC practices.