The HEADS-ED: Evaluating the Clinical Use of a Brief, Action-Oriented, Pediatric Mental Health Screening Tool.

OBJECTIVES: This effectiveness study aimed to evaluate the clinical use of the HEADS-ED tool for patients presenting to a pediatric emergency department (PED) for mental health (MH) care. METHODS: In this pragmatic trial, PED physicians used the HEADS-ED to guide their assessment and identify areas of MH need in 639 patients (mean [SD], 15.16 [1.40] years; female, 72.6%) who presented to the emergency department with MH concerns between May 2013 and March 2014. RESULTS: The HEADS-ED guided consultation to psychiatry/crisis, with 86% receiving a recommended consult. Those with a HEADS-ED score of greater than or equal to 8 and suicidality of 2 (relative risk, 2.64; confidence interval, 2.28-3.06) had a 164% increased risk of physicians requesting a consult compared with those with a score of less than 8 or greater than or equal to 8 with no suicidality of 2. The HEADS-ED mean score was significantly higher for those who received a consult (M = 6.91) than those who did not (M = 4.70; P = 0.000). Similarly, the mean score for those admitted was significantly higher (M = 7.21) than those discharged (M = 5.28; P = 0.000). Agreement on needs requiring action between PED physicians and crisis intervention workers was obtained for a subset of 140 patients and ranged from 62% to 93%. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the HEADS-ED's use by PED physicians to help guide the assessment and referral process and for discussing the clinical needs of patients among health care providers using a common action-oriented language.

Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing the HEADS-ED: A Rapid Screening Tool for Pediatric Patients in Emergency Departments.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the HEADS-ED, a screening tool appropriate for use in the emergency department (ED) that facilitates standardized assessments, discharge planning, charting, and linking pediatric mental health patients to appropriate community resources. METHODS: A qualitative theory-based design was used to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing the HEADS-ED tool. Focus groups were conducted with participants recruited from 6 different ED settings across 2 provinces (Ontario and Nova Scotia). The Theoretical Domains Framework was used as a conceptual framework to guide data collection and to identify themes from focus group discussions. RESULTS: The following themes spanning 12 domains were identified as reflective of participants' beliefs about the barriers and facilitators to implementing the HEADS-ED tool: knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, social professional role and identity, optimism, beliefs about consequences, reinforcement, environmental context and resources, social influences, emotion, behavioral regulation and memory, and attention and decision process. CONCLUSIONS: The HEADS-ED has the potential to address the need for better discharge planning, complete charting, and standardized assessments for the increasing population of pediatric mental health patients who present to EDs. This study has identified potential barriers and facilitators, which should be considered when developing an implementation plan for adopting the HEADS-ED tool into practice within EDs.

Development and validation of a brief screening instrument for psychosocial risk associated with genetic testing: a pan-Canadian cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a brief, reliable and valid instrument to screen psychosocial risk among those who are undergoing genetic testing for Adult-Onset Hereditary Disease (AOHD). DESIGN: A prospective two-phase cohort study. SETTING: 5 genetic testing centres for AOHD, such as cancer, Huntington's disease or haemochromatosis, in ambulatory clinics of tertiary hospitals across Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 141 individuals undergoing genetic testing were approached and consented to the instrument development phase of the study (Phase I). The Genetic Psychosocial Risk Instrument (GPRI) developed in Phase I was tested in Phase II for item refinement and validation. A separate cohort of 722 individuals consented to the study, 712 completed the baseline package and 463 completed all follow-up assessments. Most participants were female, at the mid-life stage. Individuals in advanced stages of the illness or with cognitive impairment or a language barrier were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Phase I: GPRI items were generated from (1) a review of the literature, (2) input from genetic counsellors and (3) phase I participants. Phase II: further item refinement and validation were conducted with a second cohort of participants who completed the GPRI at baseline and were followed for psychological distress 1-month postgenetic testing results. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: GPRI, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and Impact of Event Scale (IES). RESULTS: The final 20-item GPRI had a high reliability-Cronbach's α at 0.81. The construct validity was supported by high correlations between GPRI and BSI and IES. The predictive value was demonstrated by a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.78 plotting GPRI against follow-up assessments using HAM-D and HAM-A. CONCLUSIONS: With a cut-off score of 50, GPRI identified 84% of participants who displayed distress postgenetic testing results, supporting its potential usefulness in a clinical setting.

The HEADS-ED: a rapid mental health screening tool for pediatric patients in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics called for action for improved screening of mental health issues in the emergency department (ED). We developed the rapid screening tool home, education, activities/peers, drugs/alcohol, suicidality, emotions/behavior, discharge resources (HEADS-ED), which is a modification of "HEADS," a mnemonic widely used to obtain a psychosocial history in adolescents. The reliability and validity of the tool and its potential for use as a screening measure are presented. METHODS: ED patients presenting with mental health concerns from March 1 to May 30, 2011 were included. Crisis intervention workers completed the HEADS-ED and the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths-Mental Health tool (CANS MH) and patients completed the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI). Interrater reliability was assessed by using a second HEADS-ED rater for 20% of the sample. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients were included, mean age was 14.3 (SD 2.63), and there were 182 females (58.1%). Interrater reliability was 0.785 (P < .001). Correlations were computed for each HEADS-ED category and items from the CANS MH and the CDI. Correlations ranged from r = 0.17, P < .05 to r = 0.89, P < .000. The HEADS-ED also predicted psychiatric consult and admission to inpatient psychiatry (sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 87%; area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.82, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence to support the psychometric properties of the HEADS-ED. The study shows promising results for use in ED decision-making for pediatric patients with mental health concerns.

The primary care physician role in cancer genetics: a qualitative study of patient experience.

BACKGROUND: Increased availability of genetic testing is changing the primary care role in cancer genetics. The perspective of primary care physicians (PCPs) regarding their role in support of genetic testing has been explored, but little is known about the expectations of patients or the PCP role once genetic test results are received. METHODS: Two sets of open-ended semi-structured interviews were completed with patients (N=25) in a cancer genetic programme in Ontario, Canada, within 4 months of receiving genetic test results and 1 year later; written reports of test results were collected. RESULTS: Patients expected PCPs to play a role in referral for genetic testing; they hoped that PCPs would have sufficient knowledge to appreciate familial risk and supportive attitudes towards genetic testing. Patients had more difficulty in identifying a PCP role following receipt of genetic test results; cancer patients in particular emphasized this as a role for cancer specialists. Still, some patients anticipated an ongoing PCP role comprising risk-appropriate surveillance or reassurance, especially as specialist care diminished. These expectations were complicated by occasional confusion regarding the ongoing care appropriate to genetic test results. CONCLUSIONS: The potential PCP role in cancer genetics is quite broad. Patients expect PCPs to play a role in risk identification and genetics referral. In addition, some patients anticipated an ongoing role for their PCPs after receiving genetic test results. Sustained efforts will be needed to support PCPs in this expansive role if best use is to be made of investments in cancer genetic services.

Nurses provide valuable proxy assessment of the health-related quality of life of children with Hodgkin disease.

BACKGROUND: We prospectively compared the proxy reporting of health-related quality of life (HRQL) by parents and nurses of children with Hodgkin disease to see how well they correlated with the children's report. METHODS: Children with all stages of Hodgkin disease, their parents, and the clinic nurse were all asked to complete 4 different HRQL measures at 4 time points: 2 weeks after the first course of chemotherapy, on the third day of the second course of chemotherapy, during the third week of radiation, and 1 year after diagnosis. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients from 12 centers across Canada were enrolled in the study between May 1, 2002 and March 31, 2005. Two patients were excluded. The children's Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) generic scores increased from 64 at base line to 81 at the end of the study. There was substantial agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.6) among the participants' scores at most time points except when the child was actively receiving inpatient chemotherapy. At that time, there was only fair to moderate agreement between the child and parent, with the parents on average rating the PedsQL generic score 5 points lower than the child. The nurses still had substantial agreement at that time point with the PedsQL generic and cancer module as well as the EuroQol EQ-5D visual analogue scale visual analogue scale. CONCLUSIONS: Over the course of treatment for Hodgkin disease, there was substantial agreement among the parent's, nurse's, and children's reported HRQL scores. Nurses contribute valuable additional information as proxy respondents.

Evaluating the ability to detect change of health-related quality of life in children with Hodgkin disease.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated 4 different health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures prospectively to determine their ability to detect change over time: the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3, the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) 4.0 Generic Core and Cancer Module, the EuroQol EQ-5D visual analogue scale (EuroQol), and the Lansky Play-Performance Scale. METHODS: Children with all stages of Hodgkin disease from 12 centers across Canada were asked to complete the 4 measures at 4 time points: 2 weeks after the first course of chemotherapy, on the third day of the second course of chemotherapy, during the third week of radiation, and 1 year after diagnosis. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled in the study between May 1, 2002 and March 31, 2005. Two patients were excluded: 1 patient died shortly after the first time point and the other patient failed to complete any of the questionnaires. All measures showed a significant change between Time 1 and Time 4 (<0.05). When the change in child scores was analyzed between the time points using the child's self-reported change in HRQL, the PedsQL and the EuroQol showed significant change at all time points. CONCLUSIONS: All of the measures were able to detect change in a diverse group of children with Hodgkin disease. The PedsQL and the EuroQol appeared to be the most sensitive to change.

Decision-making about inherited cancer risk: exploring dimensions of genetic responsibility.

Since genetic information has implications for family members, some choices about genetic risk may be influenced by perceptions of responsibility to relatives. Drawing upon 25 semi-structured interviews with test recipients in Canada, this study explored decisions about inherited breast-ovarian and colon cancer. Qualitative data analysis revealed the pervasive significance of genetic responsibility in test decisions. We highlight three dimensions of genetic responsibility: 1) to know about the self for self; 2) to know about the self for others; 3) to know about the self to oblige others to know. It is argued that these dimensions of genetic responsibility have implications for test decisions, family relationships and other family members' desire to know (or not know) and to act (or not act) with respect to their own genetic risk. In particular, genetic responsibility may play out as a framing of a relative's moral obligation to know their risk that could obviate any interest they might have in not knowing. We conclude that perceptions of responsibility to-and of-other family members be thoroughly explored in genetic counseling sessions.

The influence of experiential knowledge on prenatal screening and testing decisions.

Minimal research focuses on the process of decision making in the context of prenatal screening and testing. This paper outlines an important contextual influence on these decisions. Specifically, we propose that experiential knowledge, particularly about pregnancy, screening, and disability, has a significant influence on prenatal screening and testing decisions. Drawing upon 38 semistructured interviews with women, this study explored how women made prenatal screening and testing decisions. Qualitative data analysis revealed two types of experiential knowledge, empathetic and embodied, which played a pivotal role in women's thinking about the value of prenatal tests and whether or not they accepted the offer of screening, testing, or both. We conclude that prenatal genetic counseling could benefit from an exploration of clients' experiential knowledge, both empathetic and embodied forms.