Improving alcohol-related care in small-medium primary care practices: An evaluation of an adaptation of the SPARC trial intervention for small-medium sized practices

0 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Leah K. Hamilton , Gwen T. Lapham , Anya Day , Mariah Black-Watson , Dawn Bishop , Darla Parsons , Cheryl A. Budimir , La'Tia Baulckim , Amy K. Lee , Megan Addis , Katharine A. Bradley
{"title":"Improving alcohol-related care in small-medium primary care practices: An evaluation of an adaptation of the SPARC trial intervention for small-medium sized practices","authors":"Leah K. Hamilton ,&nbsp;Gwen T. Lapham ,&nbsp;Anya Day ,&nbsp;Mariah Black-Watson ,&nbsp;Dawn Bishop ,&nbsp;Darla Parsons ,&nbsp;Cheryl A. Budimir ,&nbsp;La'Tia Baulckim ,&nbsp;Amy K. Lee ,&nbsp;Megan Addis ,&nbsp;Katharine A. Bradley","doi":"10.1016/j.josat.2025.209697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>The Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-Related Care (SPARC) trial demonstrated that 6 months of practice facilitation, decision support in electronic health records (EHRs) and performance feedback, increased identification and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) in primary care (PC). The Michigan SPARC (MI-SPARC) study tested an adaptation of SPARC for small-medium PC practices.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PC practices were recruited for and participated in alcohol-related quality improvement (2/2020–2/2023). Outcomes collected for quality improvement were used for this evaluation, with data collected manually (“manual practices”) or electronically (“electronic practices”). The prevalence of EHR-documented brief intervention (BI) and AUD medication treatment (primary outcomes), and alcohol screening and AUD diagnosis (secondary outcomes) were measured at baseline and 6-months. Secondary data from formative evaluation and practice surveys were analyzed using PRISM domains: external environment, recipients, implementation infrastructure, and intervention.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>25 practices enrolled; 14 completed data collection. Neither primary outcome was consistently monitored or collected by practices. Mean prevalence of documented screening increased from 20 % to 55 % (manual practices) and from 3 % to 20 % (electronic practices). The mean prevalences of documented AUD diagnosis at baseline and follow-up, were 1.4 % and 3.8 % (manual) and 0.1 % and 0.05 % (electronic). At follow-up, 12 practices reported screening with validated questionnaires, and 13 and 8 offering BI and AUD medications respectively. Barriers identified were low resources, small PC teams, low EHR functionality, intervention complexity, stigma, and COVID-19.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Despite adaptions for smaller PC practices and improvements in screening, MI-SPARC did not increase documented BI or AUD medication treatment, largely reflecting mismatch between intervention complexity and implementation infrastructure in PC practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73960,"journal":{"name":"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 209697"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of substance use and addiction treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949875925000761","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The Sustained Patient-centered Alcohol-Related Care (SPARC) trial demonstrated that 6 months of practice facilitation, decision support in electronic health records (EHRs) and performance feedback, increased identification and treatment of unhealthy alcohol use (UAU) in primary care (PC). The Michigan SPARC (MI-SPARC) study tested an adaptation of SPARC for small-medium PC practices.

Methods

PC practices were recruited for and participated in alcohol-related quality improvement (2/2020–2/2023). Outcomes collected for quality improvement were used for this evaluation, with data collected manually (“manual practices”) or electronically (“electronic practices”). The prevalence of EHR-documented brief intervention (BI) and AUD medication treatment (primary outcomes), and alcohol screening and AUD diagnosis (secondary outcomes) were measured at baseline and 6-months. Secondary data from formative evaluation and practice surveys were analyzed using PRISM domains: external environment, recipients, implementation infrastructure, and intervention.

Results

25 practices enrolled; 14 completed data collection. Neither primary outcome was consistently monitored or collected by practices. Mean prevalence of documented screening increased from 20 % to 55 % (manual practices) and from 3 % to 20 % (electronic practices). The mean prevalences of documented AUD diagnosis at baseline and follow-up, were 1.4 % and 3.8 % (manual) and 0.1 % and 0.05 % (electronic). At follow-up, 12 practices reported screening with validated questionnaires, and 13 and 8 offering BI and AUD medications respectively. Barriers identified were low resources, small PC teams, low EHR functionality, intervention complexity, stigma, and COVID-19.

Conclusion

Despite adaptions for smaller PC practices and improvements in screening, MI-SPARC did not increase documented BI or AUD medication treatment, largely reflecting mismatch between intervention complexity and implementation infrastructure in PC practices.
改善中小型初级保健实践中的酒精相关护理:对中小型实践中SPARC试验干预的适应性评估
持续以患者为中心的酒精相关护理(SPARC)试验表明,6个月的实践促进,电子健康记录(EHRs)中的决策支持和绩效反馈,增加了初级保健(PC)中不健康酒精使用(UAU)的识别和治疗。密歇根SPARC (MI-SPARC)研究测试了SPARC对中小型PC实践的适应性。方法在2020年2月至2023年2月期间,招募spc执业医师参与酒精相关质量改善。为质量改进收集的结果用于该评估,数据是手动收集的(“手动实践”)或电子收集的(“电子实践”)。在基线和6个月时测量ehr记录的短暂干预(BI)和AUD药物治疗(主要结果)以及酒精筛查和AUD诊断(次要结果)的患病率。来自形成性评价和实践调查的次要数据使用PRISM域进行分析:外部环境、接受者、实施基础设施和干预。结果入组25例;14 .完成数据收集。两项主要结果均未被实践持续监测或收集。记录筛查的平均流行率从20%增加到55%(手工做法),从3%增加到20%(电子做法)。记录在案的AUD诊断在基线和随访时的平均患病率分别为1.4%和3.8%(手工)和0.1%和0.05%(电子)。在随访中,12家实践报告使用有效的问卷进行筛查,13家和8家分别提供BI和AUD药物。确定的障碍是资源不足、PC团队小、电子病历功能低、干预复杂性、耻辱感和COVID-19。结论:尽管适应了较小的PC实践和筛查的改进,MI-SPARC并没有增加记录的BI或AUD药物治疗,这在很大程度上反映了PC实践中干预复杂性和实施基础设施之间的不匹配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of substance use and addiction treatment
Journal of substance use and addiction treatment Biological Psychiatry, Neuroscience (General), Psychiatry and Mental Health, Psychology (General)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信