Bhargav Kansara, Ameer Basta, Marian Mikhael, Randa Perkins, Phillip Reisman, Julie Hallanger-Johnson, Dana E Rollison, Oliver T Nguyen, Sean Powell, Scott M Gilbert, Kea Turner
{"title":"头颈部癌症患者自杀风险筛查:实施研究。","authors":"Bhargav Kansara, Ameer Basta, Marian Mikhael, Randa Perkins, Phillip Reisman, Julie Hallanger-Johnson, Dana E Rollison, Oliver T Nguyen, Sean Powell, Scott M Gilbert, Kea Turner","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1787006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong> There is limited research on suicide risk screening (SRS) among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, a population at increased risk for suicide. To address this gap, this single-site mixed methods study assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an electronic SRS program that was implemented as a part of routine care for HNC patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Staff who assisted with SRS implementation completed (e.g., nurses, medical assistants, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers) a one-time survey (<i>N</i> = 29) and interview (<i>N</i> = 25). Quantitative outcomes were assessed using previously validated feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness measures. Additional qualitative data were collected to provide context for interpreting the scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Nurses and medical assistants, who were directly responsible for implementing SRS, reported low feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness, compared with other team members (e.g., physicians, social workers, advanced practice providers). Team members identified potential improvements needed to optimize SRS, such as hiring additional staff, improving staff training, providing different modalities for screening completion among individuals with disabilities, and revising the patient-reported outcomes to improve suicide risk prediction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Staff perspectives about implementing SRS as a part of routine cancer care for HNC patients varied widely. Before screening can be implemented on a larger scale for HNC and other cancer patients, additional implementation strategies may be needed that optimize workflow and reduce staff burden, such as staff training, multiple modalities for completion, and refined tools for identifying which patients are at greatest risk for suicide.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":"15 2","pages":"404-413"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11111312/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Suicide Risk Screening for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Implementation Study.\",\"authors\":\"Bhargav Kansara, Ameer Basta, Marian Mikhael, Randa Perkins, Phillip Reisman, Julie Hallanger-Johnson, Dana E Rollison, Oliver T Nguyen, Sean Powell, Scott M Gilbert, Kea Turner\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0044-1787006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong> There is limited research on suicide risk screening (SRS) among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, a population at increased risk for suicide. To address this gap, this single-site mixed methods study assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an electronic SRS program that was implemented as a part of routine care for HNC patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Staff who assisted with SRS implementation completed (e.g., nurses, medical assistants, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers) a one-time survey (<i>N</i> = 29) and interview (<i>N</i> = 25). Quantitative outcomes were assessed using previously validated feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness measures. Additional qualitative data were collected to provide context for interpreting the scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Nurses and medical assistants, who were directly responsible for implementing SRS, reported low feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness, compared with other team members (e.g., physicians, social workers, advanced practice providers). Team members identified potential improvements needed to optimize SRS, such as hiring additional staff, improving staff training, providing different modalities for screening completion among individuals with disabilities, and revising the patient-reported outcomes to improve suicide risk prediction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Staff perspectives about implementing SRS as a part of routine cancer care for HNC patients varied widely. Before screening can be implemented on a larger scale for HNC and other cancer patients, additional implementation strategies may be needed that optimize workflow and reduce staff burden, such as staff training, multiple modalities for completion, and refined tools for identifying which patients are at greatest risk for suicide.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48956,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Clinical Informatics\",\"volume\":\"15 2\",\"pages\":\"404-413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11111312/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Clinical Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787006\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Suicide Risk Screening for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Implementation Study.
Objectives: There is limited research on suicide risk screening (SRS) among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, a population at increased risk for suicide. To address this gap, this single-site mixed methods study assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an electronic SRS program that was implemented as a part of routine care for HNC patients.
Methods: Staff who assisted with SRS implementation completed (e.g., nurses, medical assistants, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers) a one-time survey (N = 29) and interview (N = 25). Quantitative outcomes were assessed using previously validated feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness measures. Additional qualitative data were collected to provide context for interpreting the scores.
Results: Nurses and medical assistants, who were directly responsible for implementing SRS, reported low feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness, compared with other team members (e.g., physicians, social workers, advanced practice providers). Team members identified potential improvements needed to optimize SRS, such as hiring additional staff, improving staff training, providing different modalities for screening completion among individuals with disabilities, and revising the patient-reported outcomes to improve suicide risk prediction.
Conclusion: Staff perspectives about implementing SRS as a part of routine cancer care for HNC patients varied widely. Before screening can be implemented on a larger scale for HNC and other cancer patients, additional implementation strategies may be needed that optimize workflow and reduce staff burden, such as staff training, multiple modalities for completion, and refined tools for identifying which patients are at greatest risk for suicide.
期刊介绍:
ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.