Filtering by
- All Subjects: Screening
- Member of: Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) Final Projects
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.
Background and Purpose:
Depression in older adults is a significant problem that often goes undetected and untreated in primary care. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening adults for depression in primary care to increase detection, so it can be adequately managed. Despite this recommendation, screening rates in primary care are low. The purpose of this project was to implement a screening intervention and examine the effect of screening on the treatment of depression in older adults.
Methods:
The screening intervention was implemented as an evidence-based project in a small primary care practice. Consenting adults ≥ 65 years of age were screened with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Research indicates the PHQ-9 is valid and reliable for older adults. A post-screening chart audit was conducted to collect data and analyze the outcome of screening related to treatment.
Conclusions:
A total of 38 participants were screened. Five (13.2%) participants had a positive screening, two received treatment during the follow up period. The number of participants who were treated after a positive screening was significant (p= .040).
Implications for Practice:
Screening can increase detection and treatment of depression and reduce the associated illness burden in the older adult population.
Methods: Primary care providers have an opportunity to screen for sleep disorders as part of the intake process during an office visit. The Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), has been proposed as guide to determine if a sleep disorder is affecting quality of life. This descriptive study randomly recruited 20 participants from a community health center. A 10-question survey was given to individuals over the age of 18 who can write and speak English and either have a body mass index (BMI) over 30, hypertension (HTN) or diabetes type II (DMII). Demographic information evaluated included age, gender, HTN, DMII, BMI>30, marital status, sleeping alone, employment type, race, type of insurance, how many times do they wake up at night, the average number of hours slept per night and does the person work night shift.
Results: The study used a qualitative approach with a descriptive methodology; statistical analysis consisted of proportions, means and standard deviation to describe the study population. Participant age ranged from 33 to 72 years (M=50.1, SD= 11.32). Sixty percent were both female and married/living with partner. Despite being married/living with partner, 50% slept alone. A Mann-Whitney U test showed that there was a significant difference in four of the questions in the FOSQ-10 in which functional outcomes were not affected by being sleepy or tired.
Conclusion: The FOSQ-10 may serve a role in identifying patients who might benefit from a sleep study. The inclusion of a sleep disorder screening tool may increase the specificity and sensitivity of the intervention and the ability to yield data that will objectively measure disordered sleep.
Background: Sepsis remains a significant healthcare problem associated with high treatment costs and high mortality rates. Older adults are at an increased risk for developing sepsis, especially when age is combined with any type of compromising factor, such as chronic illness, recent hospitalizations, wounds, or invasive devices. Current evidence demonstrates that sepsis screening is effective for early identification of sepsis. Early identification of sepsis improves time to treatment initiation, which improves outcomes.
Methods: An evidence-based, provider approved clinical guideline was developed for a post-acute care facility after an extensive review of the literature. Upon implementation, brief educational sessions were provided to direct patient care staff. Participants completed pre- and post-tests as well as a demographic survey. A satisfaction survey was administered 30 days post intervention. A paired samples t-test was used to analyze the difference in test scores. Pearson's correlation was used to analyze the relationship between staff comfort levels and the clinical guideline.
Results: The samples included 25 participants in the educational intervention and 18 in the satisfaction survey. There was a significant difference in the scores between pre-test (M = 72.3, SD = 12.43) and post-test scores (M = 86.6, SD = 10.2); t(24) = -5.578, p < 0.001. There was a significant correlation between staff who felt comfortable in identifying sepsis with ease of screening (r = .831, p < .01) and high comfort levels with the policy (r = .889, p < .01).
Conclusion: Utilizing a clinical guideline, coupled with education, improves staff knowledge and comfort identifying sepsis in the post-acute care setting, which may improve early recognition and treatment initiation. This outcome is clinically significant as patients in this setting represent a vulnerable population.
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