Matthew P. Martin, Mindy L. McEntee, D. Mullin, Yash Suri, Constance van Eeghen
{"title":"成人初级保健中综合行为健康的患者筛查:有效程序的快速回顾。","authors":"Matthew P. Martin, Mindy L. McEntee, D. Mullin, Yash Suri, Constance van Eeghen","doi":"10.1037/fsh0000700","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nAlthough many primary care clinics screen for behavioral health (BH) conditions using validated tools, it is not clear whether adult BH screening leads to better patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the evidence base by reviewing effectiveness research for multiple strategies of BH screening in adult primary care identified in the Practice Integration Profile.\n\n\nMETHOD\nWe conducted five rapid reviews of effectiveness research supporting BH screening strategies cited in the Practice Integration Profile. Each rapid review was conducted using an adapted REAL (Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature) methodology and a standardized search tailored for each screening strategy to identify evidence related to BH screening in primary care.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe database search yielded 931 references. Following eligibility review and extraction, we evaluated data from 20 references examining five screening strategies. Results demonstrated limited support for all five strategies and high risk of bias within most studies. Outcomes associated with various BH screening strategies were rarely the focus of study.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThere is an absence of robust, well-structured evidence supporting many of the BH screening strategies advocated for in primary care. Stakeholders may wish to understand how to ensure value when developing a robust screening program that will improve patient health outcomes. Future research should advance the science of BH screen selection, timing, and implementation by answering new questions about screening strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":358476,"journal":{"name":"Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient screening for integrated behavioral health in adult primary care: A rapid review of effective procedures.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew P. Martin, Mindy L. McEntee, D. Mullin, Yash Suri, Constance van Eeghen\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/fsh0000700\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PURPOSE\\nAlthough many primary care clinics screen for behavioral health (BH) conditions using validated tools, it is not clear whether adult BH screening leads to better patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the evidence base by reviewing effectiveness research for multiple strategies of BH screening in adult primary care identified in the Practice Integration Profile.\\n\\n\\nMETHOD\\nWe conducted five rapid reviews of effectiveness research supporting BH screening strategies cited in the Practice Integration Profile. Each rapid review was conducted using an adapted REAL (Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature) methodology and a standardized search tailored for each screening strategy to identify evidence related to BH screening in primary care.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nThe database search yielded 931 references. Following eligibility review and extraction, we evaluated data from 20 references examining five screening strategies. Results demonstrated limited support for all five strategies and high risk of bias within most studies. Outcomes associated with various BH screening strategies were rarely the focus of study.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nThere is an absence of robust, well-structured evidence supporting many of the BH screening strategies advocated for in primary care. Stakeholders may wish to understand how to ensure value when developing a robust screening program that will improve patient health outcomes. Future research should advance the science of BH screen selection, timing, and implementation by answering new questions about screening strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).\",\"PeriodicalId\":358476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000700\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000700","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:尽管许多初级保健诊所使用经过验证的工具筛查行为健康(BH)状况,但尚不清楚成人BH筛查是否会导致更好的患者预后。我们的目标是通过回顾实践整合概况中确定的成人初级保健中BH筛查的多种策略的有效性研究来确定证据基础。方法:我们对实践整合概要中引用的支持BH筛查策略的有效性研究进行了五次快速回顾。每次快速回顾都使用经过改编的REAL(文献快速证据评估)方法和为每种筛查策略量身定制的标准化搜索进行,以确定与初级保健中BH筛查相关的证据。结果检索到文献931篇。在资格审查和提取之后,我们评估了来自20篇文献的数据,检查了五种筛选策略。结果表明,所有五种策略的支持有限,并且在大多数研究中存在高偏倚风险。与各种BH筛查策略相关的结果很少是研究的重点。结论缺乏有力的、结构良好的证据来支持许多在初级保健中提倡的BH筛查策略。利益相关者可能希望了解如何在制定强有力的筛查计划时确保价值,以改善患者的健康结果。未来的研究应该通过回答有关筛查策略的新问题来推进BH筛查选择、时机和实施的科学。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,版权所有)。
Patient screening for integrated behavioral health in adult primary care: A rapid review of effective procedures.
PURPOSE
Although many primary care clinics screen for behavioral health (BH) conditions using validated tools, it is not clear whether adult BH screening leads to better patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the evidence base by reviewing effectiveness research for multiple strategies of BH screening in adult primary care identified in the Practice Integration Profile.
METHOD
We conducted five rapid reviews of effectiveness research supporting BH screening strategies cited in the Practice Integration Profile. Each rapid review was conducted using an adapted REAL (Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature) methodology and a standardized search tailored for each screening strategy to identify evidence related to BH screening in primary care.
RESULTS
The database search yielded 931 references. Following eligibility review and extraction, we evaluated data from 20 references examining five screening strategies. Results demonstrated limited support for all five strategies and high risk of bias within most studies. Outcomes associated with various BH screening strategies were rarely the focus of study.
CONCLUSIONS
There is an absence of robust, well-structured evidence supporting many of the BH screening strategies advocated for in primary care. Stakeholders may wish to understand how to ensure value when developing a robust screening program that will improve patient health outcomes. Future research should advance the science of BH screen selection, timing, and implementation by answering new questions about screening strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).