Asynchronous Versus Synchronous Screening for Depression and Suicidality in a Primary Health Care System: Quality Improvement Study.

Background: Despite being a debilitating, costly, and potentially life-threatening condition, depression is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Previsit Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) may help primary care health systems identify symptoms of severe depression and prevent suicide through early intervention. Little is known about the impact of previsit web-based PHQ-9 on patient care and safety. Objective: We aimed to investigate differences among patient characteristics and provider clinical responses for patients who complete a web-based (asynchronous) versus in-clinic (synchronous) PHQ-9. Methods: This quality improvement study was conducted at 33 clinic sites across 2 health systems in Northern California from November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021, and evaluated 1683 (0.9% of total PHQs completed) records of patients endorsing thoughts that they would be better off dead or of self-harm (question 9 in the PHQ-9) following the implementation of a depression screening program that included automated electronic previsit PHQ-9 distribution. Patient demographics and providers' clinical response (suicide risk assessment, triage nurse connection, medication management, electronic consultation with psychiatrist, and referral to social worker or psychiatrist) were compared for patients with asynchronous versus synchronous PHQ-9 completion. Results: Of the 1683 patients (female: n=1071, 63.7%; non-Hispanic: n=1293, 76.8%; White: n=831, 49.4%), Hispanic and Latino patients were 40% less likely to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously (odds ratio [OR] 0.6, 95% CI 0.45-0.8; P<.001). Patients with Medicare insurance were 36% (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51-0.79) less likely to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously than patients with private insurance. Those with moderate to severe depression were 1.61 times more likely (95% CI 1.21-2.15; P=.001) to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously than those with no or mild symptoms. Patients who completed a PHQ-9 asynchronously were twice as likely to complete a Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.89-3.06; P<.001) and 77% less likely to receive a referral to psychiatry (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.16-0.34; P<.001). Those who endorsed question 9 "more than half the days" (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.06-2.48) and "nearly every day" (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.38-4.12) were more likely to receive a referral to psychiatry than those who endorsed question 9 "several days" (P=.002). Conclusions: Shifting depression screening from in-clinic to previsit led to a dramatic increase in PHQ-9 completion without sacrificing patient safety. Asynchronous PHQ-9 can decrease workload on frontline clinical team members, increase patient self-reporting, and elicit more intentional clinical responses from providers. Observed disparities will inform future improvement efforts.

Evolution of a Project to Improve Inpatient-to-Outpatient Dermatology Care Transitions: Mixed Methods Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital dermatological care has shifted from dedicated dermatology wards to consultation services, and some consulted patients may require postdischarge follow-up in outpatient dermatology. Safe and timely care transitions from inpatient-to-outpatient specialty care are critical for patient health, but communication around these transitions can be disjointed, and workflows can be complex. OBJECTIVE: In this 3-phase quality improvement effort, we developed and evaluated an intervention that leveraged an electronic health record (EHR) feature, known as SmartPhrase, to enable a new workflow to improve transitions from inpatient care to outpatient dermatology. METHODS: Phase 1 (February-March 2021) included interviews with patients and process mapping with key stakeholders to identify gaps and inform an intervention: a SmartPhrase table and associated workflow to promote collection of patient information needed for scheduling follow-up and closed-loop communication between dermatology and scheduling teams. In phase 2 (April-May 2021), semistructured interviews-with dermatologists (n=5), dermatology residents (n=5), and schedulers (n=6)-identified pain points and refinements. In phase 3, the intervention was evaluated by triangulating data from these interviews with measured changes in scheduling efficiency, visit completion, and messaging volume preimplementation (January-February 2021) and postimplementation (April-May 2021). RESULTS: Preintervention pain points included unclear workflow for care transitions, limited patient input in follow-up planning, multiple messaging channels (eg, EHR based, email, and phone messages), and time-inefficient patient tracking. The intervention addressed most pain points; interviewees reported the intervention was easy to adopt and improved scheduling efficiency, workload, and patient involvement. More visits were completed within the desired timeframe of 14 days after discharge during the postimplementation period (21/47, 45%) than the preimplementation period (28/41, 68%; P=.03). The messaging workload also decreased from 88 scheduling-related messages sent for 25 patients before implementation to 30 messages for 8 patients after implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient-to-outpatient specialty care transitions are complex and involve multiple stakeholders, thus requiring multifaceted solutions. With deliberate evaluation, broad stakeholder input, and iteration, we designed and implemented a successful solution using a standard EHR feature, SmartPhrase, integrated into a standardized workflow to improve the timeliness of posthospital specialty care and reduce workload.

Teledermatology to Facilitate Patient Care Transitions From Inpatient to Outpatient Dermatology: Mixed Methods Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Both clinicians and patients have increasingly turned to telemedicine to improve care access, even in physical examination-dependent specialties such as dermatology. However, little is known about whether teledermatology supports effective and timely transitions from inpatient to outpatient care, which is a common care coordination gap. OBJECTIVE: Using mixed methods, this study sought to retrospectively evaluate how teledermatology affected clinic capacity, scheduling efficiency, and timeliness of follow-up care for patients transitioning from inpatient to outpatient dermatology care. METHODS: Patient-level encounter scheduling data were used to compare the number and proportion of patients who were scheduled and received in-clinic or video dermatology follow-ups within 14 and 90 days after discharge across 3 phases: June to September 2019 (before teledermatology), June to September 2020 (early teledermatology), and February to May 2021 (sustained teledermatology). The time from discharge to scheduling and completion of patient follow-up visits for each care modality was also compared. Dermatology clinicians and schedulers were also interviewed between April and May 2021 to assess their perceptions of teledermatology for postdischarge patients. RESULTS: More patients completed follow-up within 90 days after discharge during early (n=101) and sustained (n=100) teledermatology use than at baseline (n=74). Thus, the clinic's capacity to provide follow-up to patients transitioning from inpatient increased from baseline by 36% in the early (101 from 74) and sustained (100 from 74) teledermatology periods. During early teledermatology use, 61.4% (62/101) of the follow-ups were conducted via video. This decreased significantly to 47% (47/100) in the following year, when COVID-19-related restrictions started to lift (P=.04), indicating more targeted but still substantial use. The proportion of patients who were followed up within the recommended 14 days after discharge did not differ significantly between video and in-clinic visits during the early (33/62, 53% vs 15/39, 38%; P=.15) or sustained (26/53, 60% vs 28/47, 49%; P=.29) teledermatology periods. Interviewees agreed that teledermatology would continue to be offered. Most considered postdischarge follow-up patients to be ideal candidates for teledermatology as they had undergone a recent in-person assessment and might have difficulty attending in-clinic visits because of competing health priorities. Some reported patients needing technological support. Ultimately, most agreed that the choice of follow-up care modality should be the patient's own. CONCLUSIONS: Teledermatology could be an important tool for maintaining accessible, flexible, and convenient care for recently discharged patients needing follow-up care. Teledermatology increased clinic capacity, even during the pandemic, although the timeliness of care transitions did not improve. Ultimately, the care modality should be determined through communication with patients to incorporate their and their caregivers' preferences.