Facilitating rapid access to addiction treatment: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Obtaining timely access to addiction medicine treatment for patients with substance use disorders is challenging and patients often have to navigate complex referral pathways. This randomized controlled trial examines the effect of providing an expedited pathway to addiction medicine treatment on initial treatment engagement and health care utilization.

Methods: Individuals with possible alcohol or opioid use disorder were recruited from three residential withdrawal management services (WMS). Subjects randomized to the Delayed Intervention (DI) group were given contact information for a nearby addiction medicine clinic; those randomized to the Rapid Intervention (RI) group were given an appointment at the clinic within 2 days and were accompanied to their first appointment.

Results: Of the 174 individuals who were screened, 106 were randomized to either the DI or RI group. The two groups were similar in demographics, housing status, and substance use in the last 30 days. In the 6-month period following randomization, 85% of the RI group attended at least one clinic appointment, compared to only 29% in the DI group (p < 0.0001). The RI group had a mean of 6.39 ED visits per subject in the 12 months after randomization, while the DI group had a mean of 13.02 ED visits per subject in the same 12-month period (p = 0.0469). Other health utilization measures did not differ between the two groups.

Conclusion: Providing immediate facilitated access to an addiction medicine service resulted in greater initial engagement and reduced emergency department visits at 6 months. Trial registration This trial is registered at the National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) under identifier #NCT01934751.

Author/s:

Srivastava, Anita, Clarke, Sarah, Hardy, Kate, Kahan, Meldon

Patient-Reported Needs Following a Referral for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Brian Desmarais — Tue, 29 Sep 2020 13:30:42 +0000

Date Added:

September 29, 2020

Journal/Publication:

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Publication Date:

February 1, 2019

URL:

Patient-Reported Needs Following a Referral for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.amepre.2018.08.017. Epub 2018 Dec 13.

MeSH

decision support techniques

early detection of cancer

Physician-Patient Relations

patient acceptance of healthcare

Patients referred for colonoscopy have lots of questions that are not always being answered by primary care clinicians. Many would appreciate being able to access additional information through the the practice’s portal. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Abstract

Introduction: Patient-physician communication about colorectal cancer screening can affect screening use, but discussions often lack information that patients need for informed decision making and seldom address personal preferences or barriers. To address this gap, a series of patient focus groups was conducted to guide the development of an online, interactive decision support program. This article presents findings on patient information needs and barriers to colorectal cancer screening after receiving a screening recommendation from a physician, and their perspectives on using electronic patient portals as platforms for health-related decision support.

Methods: Primary care patients with recent colonoscopy or stool testing orders were identified via the centralized data repository of a large Midwestern health system. Seven gender-stratified focus groups (N=45 participants) were convened between April and July 2016. Sessions were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed for commonly expressed themes beginning in August 2016.

Results: Findings reveal a consistent need for simple and clear information on colorectal cancer screening. Participants desired step-by-step explanations of the colonoscopy procedure and information about bowel preparation options/alternatives. The desired level of additional information varied: some patients wanted to know about and act on test options, whereas others preferred following their physician-recommended testing path. Fears and concerns were prevalent, particularly about colonoscopy, and patients reported challenges getting these concerns and their informational needs addressed. Finally, they expressed consistent support for using the patient portal to gather additional information from their physician.

Conclusions: Patient portals may offer an opportunity to build sustainable programs for decision support and assistance that are integrated with clinic workflows and processes.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02798224.

Author/s:

Dyer, Karen E., Shires, Deirdre A.