一种收集家庭健康史的创新策略:在初级保健诊所的有效性实施试验。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
June C Carroll, Michelle Greiver, Sahana Kukan, Erin Bearss, Sakina Walji, Rahim Moineddin, Babak Aliarzadeh, Sumeet Kalia, Judith Allanson, Eva Grunfeld, Karuna Gupta, Ruth Heisey, Doug Kavanagh, Raymond Kim, Michelle Levy, Shawna Morrison, Maria Muraca, Donatus Mutasingwa, Mary Ann O'Brien, Joanne Permaul, Frank Sullivan, Brenda Wilson
{"title":"一种收集家庭健康史的创新策略:在初级保健诊所的有效性实施试验。","authors":"June C Carroll, Michelle Greiver, Sahana Kukan, Erin Bearss, Sakina Walji, Rahim Moineddin, Babak Aliarzadeh, Sumeet Kalia, Judith Allanson, Eva Grunfeld, Karuna Gupta, Ruth Heisey, Doug Kavanagh, Raymond Kim, Michelle Levy, Shawna Morrison, Maria Muraca, Donatus Mutasingwa, Mary Ann O'Brien, Joanne Permaul, Frank Sullivan, Brenda Wilson","doi":"10.1370/afm.240472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to evaluate an innovative strategy to collect family history (FH) and explore patients' views of this strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a matched-pair effectiveness-implementation trial in family practices affiliated with the University of Toronto Practice-Based Research Network (UTOPIAN). The intervention group included family physicians (FPs) from randomly selected practices using electronic health records (EHRs) and an e-mailing platform, and randomly selected patients aged 30-69 years (4/FP/week) seen in clinic over a 6-month period. The matched control group included FPs (1:1) and patients (up to 5:1) from the UTOPIAN database. The intervention included patient and FP education, an e-mailed patient invitation to complete an FH questionnaire, automatic FH EHR upload, FP notification of completed FH questionnaire, and links to clinical support tools. Intervention patients were e-mailed a postvisit follow-up questionnaire. The assessed outcome was new documentation of FH in the EHR using mixed effects logistic regression and descriptive statistics for patient feedback.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen FPs and 576 patients were recruited from 3 multidisciplinary team practices to the intervention group, matched to 15 FPs and 2,203 patients in the control group. Within 30 days of visit, a new FH was documented in the EHR for 93/576 (16.1%) of intervention patients compared with 5/2,203 (0.2%) control patients (adjusted OR = 94.2; 95% CI, 36.8-240.8). New cancer FH documentation was greater in the intervention group compared with the control group (7.8% vs 0.1%; <i>P</i> < .01). Of patients who reported discussing FH (n = 296), 24.5% reported screening test recommended, 7.5% referral to a nongenetics specialist, and 2.4% referral to a genetics specialist. Most patients (60.5%) found this FH strategy helpful.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed improved collection/documentation of FH. Contributors to success of the intervention included being patient completed and seamless EHR integration with a reminder. This FH strategy needs tailoring to different contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"23 5","pages":"399-406"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12459678/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Innovative Strategy for Collecting Family Health History: An Effectiveness-Implementation Trial in Primary Care Clinics.\",\"authors\":\"June C Carroll, Michelle Greiver, Sahana Kukan, Erin Bearss, Sakina Walji, Rahim Moineddin, Babak Aliarzadeh, Sumeet Kalia, Judith Allanson, Eva Grunfeld, Karuna Gupta, Ruth Heisey, Doug Kavanagh, Raymond Kim, Michelle Levy, Shawna Morrison, Maria Muraca, Donatus Mutasingwa, Mary Ann O'Brien, Joanne Permaul, Frank Sullivan, Brenda Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1370/afm.240472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to evaluate an innovative strategy to collect family history (FH) and explore patients' views of this strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a matched-pair effectiveness-implementation trial in family practices affiliated with the University of Toronto Practice-Based Research Network (UTOPIAN). The intervention group included family physicians (FPs) from randomly selected practices using electronic health records (EHRs) and an e-mailing platform, and randomly selected patients aged 30-69 years (4/FP/week) seen in clinic over a 6-month period. The matched control group included FPs (1:1) and patients (up to 5:1) from the UTOPIAN database. The intervention included patient and FP education, an e-mailed patient invitation to complete an FH questionnaire, automatic FH EHR upload, FP notification of completed FH questionnaire, and links to clinical support tools. Intervention patients were e-mailed a postvisit follow-up questionnaire. The assessed outcome was new documentation of FH in the EHR using mixed effects logistic regression and descriptive statistics for patient feedback.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen FPs and 576 patients were recruited from 3 multidisciplinary team practices to the intervention group, matched to 15 FPs and 2,203 patients in the control group. Within 30 days of visit, a new FH was documented in the EHR for 93/576 (16.1%) of intervention patients compared with 5/2,203 (0.2%) control patients (adjusted OR = 94.2; 95% CI, 36.8-240.8). New cancer FH documentation was greater in the intervention group compared with the control group (7.8% vs 0.1%; <i>P</i> < .01). Of patients who reported discussing FH (n = 296), 24.5% reported screening test recommended, 7.5% referral to a nongenetics specialist, and 2.4% referral to a genetics specialist. Most patients (60.5%) found this FH strategy helpful.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed improved collection/documentation of FH. Contributors to success of the intervention included being patient completed and seamless EHR integration with a reminder. This FH strategy needs tailoring to different contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Family Medicine\",\"volume\":\"23 5\",\"pages\":\"399-406\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12459678/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Family Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.240472\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.240472","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在评估一种收集家族史(FH)的创新策略,并探讨患者对该策略的看法。方法:我们在多伦多大学基于实践的研究网络(UTOPIAN)附属的家庭实践中进行了配对有效性实施试验。干预组包括随机选择的家庭医生(FPs),使用电子健康记录(EHRs)和电子邮件平台,以及随机选择的年龄在30-69岁(4/FP/周)的6个月期间在诊所就诊的患者。匹配的对照组包括来自UTOPIAN数据库的FPs(1:1)和患者(高达5:1)。干预措施包括对患者和计划生育人员进行教育、通过电子邮件邀请患者填写生育健康问卷、自动上传生育健康电子病历、将填写好的生育健康问卷告知计划生育人员,以及链接到临床支持工具。通过电子邮件向干预患者发送一份随访问卷。评估的结果是在电子病历中使用混合效应逻辑回归和患者反馈的描述性统计来记录FH。结果:从3个多学科团队实践中招募了15名FPs和576例患者进入干预组,与对照组的15名FPs和2203例患者相匹配。在随访30天内,干预组患者中93/576(16.1%)与对照组患者中5/ 2203(0.2%)相比,EHR记录了新的FH(校正OR = 94.2; 95% CI, 36.8-240.8)。与对照组相比,干预组新的癌症FH记录更高(7.8% vs 0.1%; P < 0.01)。在报告讨论FH的患者中(n = 296), 24.5%报告推荐筛查,7.5%转诊给非遗传学专家,2.4%转诊给遗传学专家。大多数患者(60.5%)认为FH策略有帮助。结论:本研究改善了FH的收集/记录。干预成功的贡献者包括患者完成和无缝的电子病历集成与提醒。这种FH战略需要根据不同的情况进行调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Innovative Strategy for Collecting Family Health History: An Effectiveness-Implementation Trial in Primary Care Clinics.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate an innovative strategy to collect family history (FH) and explore patients' views of this strategy.

Methods: We conducted a matched-pair effectiveness-implementation trial in family practices affiliated with the University of Toronto Practice-Based Research Network (UTOPIAN). The intervention group included family physicians (FPs) from randomly selected practices using electronic health records (EHRs) and an e-mailing platform, and randomly selected patients aged 30-69 years (4/FP/week) seen in clinic over a 6-month period. The matched control group included FPs (1:1) and patients (up to 5:1) from the UTOPIAN database. The intervention included patient and FP education, an e-mailed patient invitation to complete an FH questionnaire, automatic FH EHR upload, FP notification of completed FH questionnaire, and links to clinical support tools. Intervention patients were e-mailed a postvisit follow-up questionnaire. The assessed outcome was new documentation of FH in the EHR using mixed effects logistic regression and descriptive statistics for patient feedback.

Results: Fifteen FPs and 576 patients were recruited from 3 multidisciplinary team practices to the intervention group, matched to 15 FPs and 2,203 patients in the control group. Within 30 days of visit, a new FH was documented in the EHR for 93/576 (16.1%) of intervention patients compared with 5/2,203 (0.2%) control patients (adjusted OR = 94.2; 95% CI, 36.8-240.8). New cancer FH documentation was greater in the intervention group compared with the control group (7.8% vs 0.1%; P < .01). Of patients who reported discussing FH (n = 296), 24.5% reported screening test recommended, 7.5% referral to a nongenetics specialist, and 2.4% referral to a genetics specialist. Most patients (60.5%) found this FH strategy helpful.

Conclusions: This study showed improved collection/documentation of FH. Contributors to success of the intervention included being patient completed and seamless EHR integration with a reminder. This FH strategy needs tailoring to different contexts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Family Medicine
Annals of Family Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.50%
发文量
142
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Annals of Family Medicine is a peer-reviewed research journal to meet the needs of scientists, practitioners, policymakers, and the patients and communities they serve.
×
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