Implementation of Psychosocial Screening into Diabetes Clinics: Experience from the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Network.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although advances in diabetes technology and pharmacology have significantly and positively impacted diabetes management and health outcomes for some, diabetes care remains burdensome and can be challenging to balance with other life priorities. The purpose of this article is to review the rationale for assessment of psychosocial domains in diabetes care settings and strategies for the implementation of psychosocial screening into routine practice. Survey data from the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Network is highlighted. RECENT FINDINGS: Implementation of psychosocial screening requires identifying the population; selecting validated tools to assess target domains; determining frequency of screening and mode of survey delivery; and scoring, interpreting, documenting, and facilitating referrals such that these processes are part of clinical workflows. Recognizing the influence of psychosocial factors for people with diabetes (PWD), professional society guidelines for comprehensive diabetes care recommend the integration of psychosocial screening into routine care.

Predicting Adolescent Electronic Cigarette Use: Differences by Never, Ever, and Current Users.

OBJECTIVE: Rising rates of adolescent electronic cigarette (ECIG) use is concerning because it can lead to adverse health outcomes and increased risk behavior. There are known predictors of ever versus never ECIG use, but less are known about risk factors for ever versus current use of ECIGs. Problem behavior theory (PBT) was used to evaluate possible risk factors for different ECIG use status. METHODS: Participants were 573 high school students who completed questionnaires measuring ECIG use, as well as constructs within the Social Environment, Perceived Environment, Personality, and Behavior domains of PBT. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate how predictor variables differentiated between participants who reported (a) never use, (b) ever ECIG use, or (c) current ECIG use. RESULTS: Adolescents were more likely to endorse ever ECIG use than never use if they reported peer ECIG use, perceived more benefits and fewer costs (e.g., health) of ECIG use, higher extraversion, alcohol and cigarette use (never vs. ever vs. past 30 days), or attended a school with a higher percentage of socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Adolescents were more likely to report current ECIG use than ever ECIG use if they perceived fewer costs of ECIG use or used cannabis in their lifetime (yes/no). CONCLUSIONS: PBT variables differentiated between ever ECIG use and never ECIG use. However, these variables did not differentiate between ever and current ECIG use. Identifying unique risk factors for current versus ever ECIG use is important to understanding persistent ECIG use and subsequent targeted prevention and intervention programs.

Validation of the Electronic Cigarette Expectancy Scale for Adolescents.

INTRODUCTION: Expectancies of costs and benefits can be predictive of tobacco use, as well as cessation attempts and success. Measuring electronic cigarette (ECIG) expectancies is in its infancy, particularly among adolescents. However, the popularity of adolescent ECIG use demonstrates the need to understand better these contributing factors. Our aim was to evaluate the factor structure and initial psychometric properties of an ECIG expectancies questionnaire adapted from an existing validated scale for conventional cigarette smoking (Smoking Expectancy Scale for Adolescents; SESA). METHODS: Five-hundred sixty-nine adolescents (14-18 years; 60.1% female; 84.1% White) were recruited from high schools and an adolescent medicine clinic. Participants completed a battery of self-report measures, including the ECIG Expectancies Scale for Adolescents (EESA). Exploratory factor analyses were used to examine the underlying factor structure, and convergent validity was evaluated using variables conceptually related to ECIG expectancies. RESULTS: A three-factor solution was chosen based on statistical evidence and conceptual relevance. All three factors - Costs, Social Benefits, and Affective/Weight Benefits - had strong internal consistencies and demonstrated convergent validity via significant associations with peer ECIG use and Conscientiousness. The Costs and Affective/Weight Benefits factors also demonstrated convergent validity with sensation-seeking, intention to use ECIGs, and ECIG use status (current, lifetime, nonuser). CONCLUSION: Results support the initial reliability and validity of the EESA scores. This factor structure is related to, yet different from, that observed not only for the SESA but also for other ECIG-expectancy measures among adult populations.

Associations Between Peer Use, Costs and Benefits, Self-Efficacy, and Adolescent E-cigarette Use.

OBJECTIVE: Prior research identified peer use as a salient risk factor of adolescent electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use, but has not expanded on the mechanisms of this association. METHODS: Participants were 562 adolescents recruited from rural and suburban public high schools and an adolescent medicine clinic in the mid-Atlantic United States. Participants completed a packet of questionnaires that assessed demographics, substance use, expectations about the consequences of e-cigarette use, and perceptions of their own self-efficacy to resist using e-cigarettes. We estimated a series of mediation models using the MODEL INDIRECT command in MPLUS statistical software. In all models, significance of indirect effects from peer e-cigarette use to self-reported e-cigarette use were tested via two variables: (a) expected costs, (b) benefits of e-cigarette use, and (c) the perceived self-efficacy of the individual to refrain from e-cigarette use. RESULTS: Adolescents with more peers using e-cigarettes were more likely to have ever used an e-cigarette and perceived greater benefits and fewer costs, which was associated with a reduced self-efficacy to refrain from e-cigarette smoking (Model 1). Those with more peers using e-cigarettes were more likely to be currently using e-cigarettes themselves because they perceived greater benefits and fewer costs, which was associated with a reduced self-efficacy to refrain from e-cigarette smoking (Model 2). CONCLUSION: Peer use, self-efficacy to resist use, and expectations of cost and benefits of e-cigarette use should be considered as possible targets when devising tailored interventions and policies to prevent or reduce negative health consequences of long-term e-cigarette use.

Implementation of a Psychosocial Screener for Adults in an Outpatient Burn Clinic.

Burn injuries are significant medical traumas often resulting in substantial psychosocial distress. Early identification of psychosocial concerns is crucial to developing individualized treatments to improve psychosocial functioning. Few studies have examined the prevalence of a broad range of psychosocial concerns in an adult outpatient burn setting. In this study, they developed and implemented a screening instrument to identify patients experiencing acute psychosocial distress/risk and patients with mental health difficulties necessitating a psychology consult. The instrument assessed depression, anxiety, substance abuse, posttraumatic stress, perceived safety at home, and suicidal ideation. Adult patients (N = 178) completed the screener during an initial outpatient clinic visit. Responses on the screener were used to identify patients as "high risk" (ie, endorsing suicidal ideation and/or feeling unsafe at home), "moderate risk" (ie, endorsing no-acute mental health symptoms), or "low risk" (ie, few to no symptoms endorsed). Patients in the "high risk" category were immediately evaluated by the attending physician, who then determined whether emergency treatment was needed. Patients in the "moderate risk" category were referred to the on-site psychology team for in-person or phone consultation within 3 days of screener completion. Of the 178 individuals screened, a majority endorsed low to no psychosocial distress (N = 124; 69.7%). About one-third (N = 52) indicated moderate levels of psychosocial distress, and two patients (1.1%) endorsed acute psychosocial distress. This novel screening tool was effectively implemented in an outpatient burn clinic and demonstrates considerable promise for identifying psychosocially vulnerable patients in an adult burn survivor population.