A Quality Improvement Innovation for Reproductive Health Planning in the Time of COVID.

OBJECTIVES: To see if an outreach approach with telehealth is feasible and acceptable to patients to talk about their reproductive health; and as a secondary outcome, capture data on time spent on the visit and what kind of information was discussed. METHODS: A registry was created from three family physicians' panels of all adult patients with anticipated ability to become pregnant ages 18-45 who had not had a documented reproductive health discussion in the previous 6 months. Using that registry, outreach was performed to schedule a telehealth visit to discuss their reproductive health with their primary care provider. The visit was standardized using the One Key Question approach. For patients who agreed to participate in the research, the patient completed a survey about their experience. The provider also completed a survey on the time spent and the issues addressed. RESULTS: Two hundred and six patients were called. Ninety patients (44%) could not be reached. Of the remaining patients, 34 scheduled either a telehealth or in-person visit and 7 also agreed to participate in the survey. New information was uncovered in the visit in 86% of participants. The most common need uncovered during the visit was unrelated medical needs (71%), followed by preconception health education/advice (43%) and contraception needs/counseling (29%). Most participants found the telehealth visit valuable. CONCLUSIONS: An outreach methodology can uncover unmet health needs, both reproductive and otherwise. We found that people who had the visit often needed something, but a majority of patients declined the visit saying that they did not think they needed it. It is possible that patients are not aware of the value of reproductive health discussions, and therefore clinicians need to take every opportunity to have these discussions whenever possible, whether through outreach or inreach (during already scheduled visits).

Comparing the PHQ-9 to the Multidimensional Behavioral Health Screen in Predicting Depression-Related Symptomatology in a Primary Medical Care Sample.

Depression is the most common form of psychopathology affecting people in the US. It is commonly diagnosed and treated in primary medical care settings, creating a need for a reliable, quick self-report tool used for the assessment of depression in this context. There is an emerging shift in the way psychopathology is conceptualized, as the field begins to transition from a categorical, syndrome-based model to a dimensional model. This change should be reflected in the assessment tool used within the primary care setting. The PHQ-9 is currently the most frequently used assessment tool for evaluating depression within primary care clinics, despite being based on the heterogenous, categorical method of conceptualizing psychopathology. The Multidimensional Behavioral Health Screen is a brief and efficient screening-level assessment tool for core psychopathology components (rather than syndromes), with a specific focus on depressive symptomatology. This study presents empirical evidence supporting the implementation of the MBHS in primary care clinics as a useful alternative to the PHQ-9.

Primary Care Women's Health Screening: A Case Study of a Community Engaged Human Centered Design Approach to Enhancing the Screening Process.

PURPOSE: To apply a Human Centered Design (HCD) approach to co-designing a comprehensive women's health screening tool with community partners. DESCRIPTION: Evidenced-based health screenings for behaviors and risks are important tools in primary health care and disease prevention, especially for women. However, numerous barriers limit the effective implementation of comprehensive health screenings, and often lead to excluding important risks such as intimate partner violence (IPV). Utilizing a human centered design approach (HCD), Mountain Area Health Education Center (MAHEC, NC USA) developed a community co-designed 9-topic health screening for women. Key end-users were recruited to participate in the design process, including women who identified IPV as a health issue in their community, Spanish speaking women, domestic violence program organizers, and MAHEC staff. ASSESSMENT: A total of 21 participants collaborated during three design sessions on two specific goals: 1) creating a comprehensive women's health screening tool from the existing tools that were in use in our clinics at the time, and 2) incorporating IPV screening. Through the HCD sessions, participants highlighted the impact of what they termed "Triple T: time, trust and talk" on the effectiveness of women's health screening. CONCLUSION: Our co-designed women's health screening tool is a first step towards addressing screening barriers from both primary care provider's and community women's perspectives. Future research will explore the facilitators of and barriers to implementing the tools in different primary care settings. Future work should also more systematically examine whether and how screening processes may reinforce or contribute to women's feelings of being stereotyped, and how screening processes can be designed to avoid stereotype threat, which has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of screenings intended to promote women's health.