Implementing and Enhancing Social and Economic Needs Screening at a Federally Qualified Health Center.

BACKGROUND: Programs to screen for social and economic needs (SENs) are challenging to implement. AIM: To describe implementation of an SEN screening program for patients obtaining care at a federally qualified health center (FQHC). SETTING: Large Chicago-area FQHC where many patients are Hispanic/Latino and insured through Medicaid. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: In the program's phase 1 (beginning April 2020), a prescreening question asked about patients' interest in receiving community resources; staff then called interested patients. After several refinements (e.g., increased staffing, tailored reductions in screening frequency) to address challenges such as a large screening backlog, program phase 2 began in February 2021. In phase 2, a second prescreening question asked about patients' preferred modality to learn about community resources (text/email versus phone calls). PROGRAM EVALUATION: During phase 1, 8925 of 29,861 patients (30%) expressed interest in community resources. Only 40% of interested patients were successfully contacted and screened. In phase 2, 5781 of 21,737 patients (27%) expressed interest in resources; 84% of interested patients were successfully contacted by either text/email (43%) or phone (41%). DISCUSSION: Under one-third of patients obtaining care at an FQHC expressed interest in community resources for SENs. After program refinements, rates of follow-up with interested patients substantially increased.

Examining How Social Risk Factors Are Integrated Into Clinical Settings Using Existing Data: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Integrating social care into clinical care requires substantial resources. Use of existing data through a geographic information system (GIS) has the potential to support efficient and effective integration of social care into clinical settings. We conducted a scoping literature review characterizing its use in primary care settings to identify and address social risk factors. METHODS: In December 2018, we searched 2 databases and extracted structured data for eligible articles that (1) described the use of GIS in clinical settings to identify and/or intervene on social risks, (2) were published between December 2013 and December 2018, and (3) were based in the United States. Additional studies were identified by examining references. RESULTS: Of the 5,574 articles included for review, 18 met study eligibility criteria: 14 (78%) were descriptive studies, 3 (17%) tested an intervention, and 1 (6%) was a theoretical report. All studies used GIS to identify social risks (increase awareness); 3 studies (17%) described interventions to address social risks, primarily by identifying relevant community resources and aligning clinical services to patients' needs. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies describe associations between GIS and population health outcomes; however, there is a paucity of literature regarding GIS use to identify and address social risk factors in clinical settings. GIS technology may assist health systems seeking to address population health outcomes through alignment and advocacy; its current application in clinical care delivery is infrequent and largely limited to referring patients to local community resources.

Identifying and addressing social determinants of health in outpatient practice: results of a program-wide survey of internal and family medicine residents.

BACKGROUND: Up to 60% of preventable mortality is attributable to social determinants of health (SDOH), yet training on SDOH competencies is not widely implemented in residency. The objective of this study was to assess internal and family medicine residents' competence at identifying and addressing SDOH. METHODS: Residents' perceived competence at identifying, discussing, and addressing SDOH in outpatient settings was assessed using a single questionnaire administered in March 2017. In this cross-sectional analysis, bivariate associations of resident characteristics with the following outcomes were examined: identifying, discussing, and addressing patients' challenges related to SDOH through referrals. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 129 (84%) residents. Twenty residents (16%) reported an annual income of less than $50,000 during childhood. Overall, 108 residents (84%) reported previous SDOH training. Two-thirds had outpatient practices in Veterans Affairs or safety-net clinics. Thirty-nine (30%) intended to pursue a career in primary care. The following numbers of residents reported high levels of competence for performing these outcomes: identifying patients' challenges related to SDOH: 37 (29%); discussing them with patients: 18 (14%); and addressing these challenges through referrals to internal and external resources: 13 (10%) and 11 (9%), respectively. Factors associated with higher competence included older age, lower childhood household income, prior education about SDOH, primary practice site and intention to practice primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Most residents had previous SDOH training, yet only a small proportion of residents reported being highly competent at identifying or addressing SDOH. Providing opportunities for practical training may be a key component in preparing medical residents to identify and address SDOH effectively in outpatient practice.

Developing Equity Report Cards for Residents Training in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Most residency programs do not provide trainees with health equity data for their clinic patients. METHODS: Equity report cards were developed for internal and family medicine residents in a large health system. After considering which equity indictors were available, how to attribute patients to residents, and what level of granularity was feasible, equity reports were created for five ambulatory quality measures. Chi-square tests were used to test the significance of differences in quality measure satisfaction between groups. RESULTS: Attributing patients to the physician who had seen them for the greatest proportion of encounters performed best. Creating equity reports for individual resident panels was not possible due to insufficient numbers. Most measures had sufficient patients when combining all residents' patients. Inequities were identified for four of five examined measures. CONCLUSION: Creating aggregate equity reports for all primary care residents across multiple equity indicators was feasible, documenting disparities in health care quality.

Identifying and Addressing Social Determinants of Health in the Primary Care Clinical Training Environment: A Survey of the Landscape.

INTRODUCTION: This study surveyed the use of systematic strategies to address social determinants of health in the primary care clinical training environment. METHODS: We designed a 51-item questionnaire targeting medical educators from internal medicine, pediatrics, and family practice to assess strategies to identify and mitigate social needs, the role of trainees in this process, and barriers/facilitators to systematic approaches. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 104 medical educators from 77 institutions. Of the 104 respondents, 28% were not familiar with any standardized tools used for screening for social needs, 27% use geospatial (GIS) or geographic information system (GIG) data, and 35% reported that trainees were not involved in any part of assisting. CONCLUSION: Nearly one third of medical educators lack familiarity with standardized screening tools for social needs. More than one third reported that trainees are not involved with mitigating social needs. Geospatial and GIS data are not utilized frequently.

Disparities in registration and use of an online patient portal among older adults: findings from the LitCog cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To document disparities in registration and use of an online patient portal among older adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 534 older adults were linked with information from the Northwestern Medicine Electronic Data Warehouse on patient portal registration and use of functions (secure messaging, prescription reauthorizations, checking test results, and monitoring vital statistics). Age, gender, race, education, self-reported chronic conditions, and the Newest Vital Sign health literacy measure were available from cohort data. RESULTS: Most patients (93.4%) had a patient portal access code generated for them, and among these 57.5% registered their accounts. In multivariable analyses, White patients (P < .001) and college graduates were more likely to have registered their patient portal (P = .015). Patients with marginal (P = .034) or adequate (P < .001) health literacy were also more likely to have registered their patient portal. Among those registering their accounts, most had messaged their physician (90%), checked a test result (96%), and ordered a reauthorization (55%), but few monitored their vital statistics (11%). Adequate health literacy patients were more likely to have used the messaging function (P = .003) and White patients were more likely to have accessed test results (P = .004). Higher education was consistently associated with prescription reauthorization requests (all P < .05). DISCUSSION: Among older American adults, there are stark health literacy, educational, and racial disparities in the registration, and subsequent use of an online patient portal. These population sub-group differences may exacerbate existing health disparities. CONCLUSIONS: If patient portals are implemented, intervention strategies are needed to monitor and reduce disparities in their use.

Disparities in enrollment and use of an electronic patient portal.

BACKGROUND: With emphasis on the meaningful use of electronic health records, patient portals are likely to become increasingly important. Little is known about patient enrollment in, and use of, patient portals after explicit invitation from providers. OBJECTIVES: To examine enrollment in, and use of, an electronic patient portal by race/ethnicity, gender and age. DESIGN: Observational, cross sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with attending physicians seen at one urban, academic primary care practice between May 2008 and October 2009 who received electronic orders inviting their participation in an electronic patient portal. MAIN MEASURES: (a) Enrollment in the patient portal, (b) Solicitation of provider advice among enrollees, (c) Requests for medication refills among enrollees. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 69% of 7,088 patients enrolled in the patient portal. All minority patients were significantly less likely to enroll than whites: 55% blacks, 64% Latinos and 66% Asians compared with 74% whites (chi-square p < 0.05 for all pairwise comparisons). These disparities persisted in adjusted analyses, although differences for Asians were no longer significant. In addition, the oldest patients were less likely to enroll than the youngest (adjusted OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97). Although there were no racial/ethnic disparities in use of the patient portal among enrollees, we found differences by age and gender. The youngest patients were significantly less likely to solicit provider advice or request medication refills than any other age group in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Similarly, male patients were less likely to solicit provider advice than women in all analyses. CONCLUSION: Large racial/ethnic disparities were seen in enrollment in our patient portal. Among enrollees, use of the portal was similar by race/ethnicity, but not by age or gender. Future efforts to expand use of the patient portal need to address potential mechanisms for these disparities to ensure this technology is accessible to diverse patient populations.