Implementation of universal screening for substance use in pregnancy in a public healthcare system

{"title":"Implementation of universal screening for substance use in pregnancy in a public healthcare system","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.xagr.2024.100384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Screening questionnaires are one option for identification of at-risk substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) during pregnancy. We report the experience of a single institution following universal implementation of a brief screening tool for self-reported substance use at the first prenatal encounter.</p></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><p>This is a prospective implementation study evaluating screening for substance use in pregnancy in a large safety net healthcare system. Universal screening with the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Quick Screen V1.0 was integrated into the electronic medical record (EMR) and administered at the first point of contact with the healthcare system. SUD was identified initially with diagnosis within the EMR by a healthcare provider and was confirmed with toxicology (maternal or neonatal) results corroborating a pattern of substance use and maternal and neonatal ICD-10 codes for SUD. Patients identified with SUD were then classified as moderate or severe SUD based on criteria established by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition. We measured rates of NIDA implementation across different healthcare settings, evaluated NIDA concordance with ascertainment of SUD, and compared adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with moderate and severe SUD.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>From July 28, 2021, through June 25, 2022, 14,634 unique pregnant individuals accessed care at ambulatory and acute care sites. Universal implementation of the NIDA Quick Screen identified at-risk substance use in 2146 (14.7%) of those who accessed our system, or 17.1% of 12,550 screened across the system, with greater screen completion in ambulatory over acute care settings. SUD was identified in 256 (1.7%) of 14,634 individuals and moderate or severe SUD was identified in 184 (1.3%). Among those with moderate or severe SUD, 90 (48.9%) were NIDA positive, 22 (12.0%) NIDA negative, and 72 (39.1%) unscreened. Of 94 individuals with NIDA discordance or who were unscreened 76 (81%) accessed initial care through an acute care setting. Of 96 individuals with opioid use disorder, 68 (70.8%) were treated with medication-assisted therapy, and 56 (58.3%) were screened with the NIDA Quick Screen. Among delivered individuals with available outcomes, those with moderate or severe SUD were less likely to seek prenatal care (71 (76%) vs 9852 (98%), &lt;0.001)) and more likely to deliver before 37 weeks, (18 (20%) vs 909 (9%), RR (95% CI) 2.13 (1.40, 3.24)) compared to individuals without SUD. Neonates exposed to moderate or severe SUD were more likely to have birth weight &lt;10th centile for gestational age (20 (22%) vs 1147 (12%), RR (95% CI) 1.92 (1.29, 2.85)) and require admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (19 (21%) vs 964 (10%), RR (95%) 1.95 (1.30, 2.93)).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Universal screening was implemented across a large public healthcare system at a high rate, with higher rates of implementation in ambulatory settings. NIDA successfully identified at-risk substance use in 17% of the SUD cohort but failed to identify more than 50% of patients with moderate or severe SUD. Patients with moderate and severe SUD accessed care primarily through the emergency department and experienced higher rates of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Future efforts to identify, engage, and retain this highest-risk group are needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72141,"journal":{"name":"AJOG global reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666577824000789/pdfft?md5=f18b439e9878396139ed787ccfd877cc&pid=1-s2.0-S2666577824000789-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOG global reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666577824000789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Screening questionnaires are one option for identification of at-risk substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) during pregnancy. We report the experience of a single institution following universal implementation of a brief screening tool for self-reported substance use at the first prenatal encounter.

Study Design

This is a prospective implementation study evaluating screening for substance use in pregnancy in a large safety net healthcare system. Universal screening with the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Quick Screen V1.0 was integrated into the electronic medical record (EMR) and administered at the first point of contact with the healthcare system. SUD was identified initially with diagnosis within the EMR by a healthcare provider and was confirmed with toxicology (maternal or neonatal) results corroborating a pattern of substance use and maternal and neonatal ICD-10 codes for SUD. Patients identified with SUD were then classified as moderate or severe SUD based on criteria established by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition. We measured rates of NIDA implementation across different healthcare settings, evaluated NIDA concordance with ascertainment of SUD, and compared adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with moderate and severe SUD.

Results

From July 28, 2021, through June 25, 2022, 14,634 unique pregnant individuals accessed care at ambulatory and acute care sites. Universal implementation of the NIDA Quick Screen identified at-risk substance use in 2146 (14.7%) of those who accessed our system, or 17.1% of 12,550 screened across the system, with greater screen completion in ambulatory over acute care settings. SUD was identified in 256 (1.7%) of 14,634 individuals and moderate or severe SUD was identified in 184 (1.3%). Among those with moderate or severe SUD, 90 (48.9%) were NIDA positive, 22 (12.0%) NIDA negative, and 72 (39.1%) unscreened. Of 94 individuals with NIDA discordance or who were unscreened 76 (81%) accessed initial care through an acute care setting. Of 96 individuals with opioid use disorder, 68 (70.8%) were treated with medication-assisted therapy, and 56 (58.3%) were screened with the NIDA Quick Screen. Among delivered individuals with available outcomes, those with moderate or severe SUD were less likely to seek prenatal care (71 (76%) vs 9852 (98%), <0.001)) and more likely to deliver before 37 weeks, (18 (20%) vs 909 (9%), RR (95% CI) 2.13 (1.40, 3.24)) compared to individuals without SUD. Neonates exposed to moderate or severe SUD were more likely to have birth weight <10th centile for gestational age (20 (22%) vs 1147 (12%), RR (95% CI) 1.92 (1.29, 2.85)) and require admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (19 (21%) vs 964 (10%), RR (95%) 1.95 (1.30, 2.93)).

Conclusion

Universal screening was implemented across a large public healthcare system at a high rate, with higher rates of implementation in ambulatory settings. NIDA successfully identified at-risk substance use in 17% of the SUD cohort but failed to identify more than 50% of patients with moderate or severe SUD. Patients with moderate and severe SUD accessed care primarily through the emergency department and experienced higher rates of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes. Future efforts to identify, engage, and retain this highest-risk group are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在公共医疗保健系统中实施孕期药物使用普遍筛查
目的筛查问卷是识别孕期药物使用风险和药物使用障碍(SUD)的一种方法。研究设计这是一项前瞻性实施研究,评估了大型安全网医疗保健系统对孕期药物使用情况的筛查。美国国家药物滥用研究所(NIDA)的快速筛查 V1.0 被整合到电子病历(EMR)中,并在与医疗保健系统的首次接触时进行普遍筛查。通过医疗服务提供者在 EMR 中的诊断初步确定 SUD,并通过证实药物使用模式的毒理学(孕产妇或新生儿)结果以及孕产妇和新生儿 SUD 的 ICD-10 编码进行确认。然后,根据《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第 5 版制定的标准,将确定为 SUD 的患者划分为中度或重度 SUD。我们测量了不同医疗机构的 NIDA 实施率,评估了 NIDA 与 SUD 确定的一致性,并比较了与中度和重度 SUD 相关的不良妊娠结局。在使用我们系统的人中,有 2146 人(14.7%)通过普遍实施 NIDA 快速筛查发现有药物使用风险,占整个系统筛查的 12,550 人的 17.1%,非住院医疗机构的筛查完成率高于急诊医疗机构。在 14634 人中,有 256 人(1.7%)被确认患有药物滥用症,184 人(1.3%)被确认患有中度或重度药物滥用症。在中度或重度 SUD 患者中,90 人(48.9%)NIDA 阳性,22 人(12.0%)NIDA 阴性,72 人(39.1%)未接受筛查。在 94 名 NIDA 不一致或未经筛查的患者中,有 76 人(81%)通过急症护理机构获得了初步护理。在 96 名阿片类药物使用障碍患者中,68 人(70.8%)接受了药物辅助治疗,56 人(58.3%)接受了 NIDA 快速筛查。与无阿片类药物滥用症的患者相比,有中度或重度阿片类药物滥用症的患者不太可能寻求产前护理(71 (76%) vs 9852 (98%),<0.001)),而且更有可能在 37 周前分娩(18 (20%) vs 909 (9%),RR (95% CI) 2.13 (1.40, 3.24))。接触中度或重度 SUD 的新生儿出生体重超过胎龄第 10 百分位数的几率更高(20 (22%) vs 1147 (12%),RR (95% CI) 1.92 (1.29, 2.85)),需要入住新生儿重症监护室(NICU)的几率更高(19 (21%) vs 964 (10%),RR (95%) 1.结论在一个大型公共医疗系统中,普遍筛查的实施率很高,在门诊环境中的实施率更高。在 17% 的 SUD 群体中,NIDA 成功识别了高危药物使用,但未能识别 50% 以上的中度或重度 SUD 患者。中度和重度 SUD 患者主要通过急诊科接受治疗,产科和新生儿不良后果发生率较高。今后需要努力识别、参与并留住这一最高风险群体。
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 去求助
来源期刊
AJOG global reports
AJOG global reports Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Perinatology, Pediatrics and Child Health, Urology
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute Sheehan syndrome following massive postpartum hemorrhage due to vulvar hematoma The role of the RHOA/ROCK pathway in the regulation of myometrial stages throughout pregnancy Thoughts and opinions about fertility preservation and family building from the transgender community—an interview-based approach Guillain-Barré syndrome in pregnancy: a case report and review of the literature Using machine learning to predict the risk of developing hypertensive disorders of pregnancy using a contemporary nulliparous cohort
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1