Anne M Gadomski1, Kate E Fothergill2, Susan Larson2, Lawrence S Wissow2, Heather Winegrad2, Zsolt J Nagykaldi3, Ardis L Olson4, Debra L Roter2. 1. Bassett Research Institute, Bassett Medical Center, Cooperstown, New York. Electronic address: anne.gadomski@bassett.org. 2. Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Department of Family & Preventive Medicine, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate how a comprehensive, computerized, self-administered adolescent screener, the DartScreen, affects within-visit patient-doctor interactions such as data gathering, advice giving, counseling, and discussion of mental health issues. METHODS: Patient-doctor interaction was compared between visits without screening and those with the DartScreen completed before the visit. Teens, aged 15-19 years scheduled for an annual visit, were recruited at one urban and one rural pediatric primary care clinic. The doctor acted as his/her own control, first using his/her usual routine for five to six adolescent annual visits. Then, the DartScreen was introduced for five visits where at the beginning of the visit, the doctor received a summary report of the screening results. All visits were audio recorded and analyzed using the Roter interaction analysis system. Doctor and teen dialogue and topics discussed were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Seven midcareer doctors and 72 adolescents participated; 37 visits without DartScreen and 35 with DartScreen were audio recorded. The Roter interaction analysis system defined medically related data gathering (mean, 36.8 vs. 32.7 statements; p = .03) and counseling (mean, 36.8 vs. 32.7 statements; p = .01) decreased with DartScreen; however, doctor responsiveness and engagement improved with DartScreen (mean, 4.8 vs. 5.1 statements; p = .00). Teens completing the DartScreen offered more psychosocial information (mean, 18.5 vs. 10.6 statements; p = .01), and mental health was discussed more after the DartScreen (mean, 93.7 vs. 43.5 statements; p = .03). Discussion of somatic and substance abuse topics did not change. Doctors reported that screening improved visit organization and efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the screener increased discussion of mental health but not at the expense of other adolescent health topics.
PURPOSE: To evaluate how a comprehensive, computerized, self-administered adolescent screener, the DartScreen, affects within-visit patient-doctor interactions such as data gathering, advice giving, counseling, and discussion of mental health issues. METHODS:Patient-doctor interaction was compared between visits without screening and those with the DartScreen completed before the visit. Teens, aged 15-19 years scheduled for an annual visit, were recruited at one urban and one rural pediatric primary care clinic. The doctor acted as his/her own control, first using his/her usual routine for five to six adolescent annual visits. Then, the DartScreen was introduced for five visits where at the beginning of the visit, the doctor received a summary report of the screening results. All visits were audio recorded and analyzed using the Roter interaction analysis system. Doctor and teen dialogue and topics discussed were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Seven midcareer doctors and 72 adolescents participated; 37 visits without DartScreen and 35 with DartScreen were audio recorded. The Roter interaction analysis system defined medically related data gathering (mean, 36.8 vs. 32.7 statements; p = .03) and counseling (mean, 36.8 vs. 32.7 statements; p = .01) decreased with DartScreen; however, doctor responsiveness and engagement improved with DartScreen (mean, 4.8 vs. 5.1 statements; p = .00). Teens completing the DartScreen offered more psychosocial information (mean, 18.5 vs. 10.6 statements; p = .01), and mental health was discussed more after the DartScreen (mean, 93.7 vs. 43.5 statements; p = .03). Discussion of somatic and substance abuse topics did not change. Doctors reported that screening improved visit organization and efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the screener increased discussion of mental health but not at the expense of other adolescent health topics.
Authors: Ardis L Olson; Cecelia A Gaffney; Viking A Hedberg; Wendy Gladstone; Sam Dugan; Robert Mathes; Paul Reiss Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Christina D Adams; Kathaleen C Perkins; Vicki Lumley; Christine Hughes; James J Burns; Hatim A Omar Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Rinad S Beidas; Shari Jager-Hyman; Emily M Becker-Haimes; Courtney Benjamin Wolk; Brian K Ahmedani; John E Zeber; Joel A Fein; Gregory K Brown; Courtney A Gregor; Adina Lieberman; Steven C Marcus Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2018-11-30 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Matthew C Aalsma; Ashley M Zerr; Dillon J Etter; Fangqian Ouyang; Amy Lewis Gilbert; Rebekah L Williams; James A Hall; Stephen M Downs Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Andrea M Knight; Michelle E Vickery; Alexander G Fiks; Frances K Barg Journal: Pediatr Rheumatol Online J Date: 2015-11-24 Impact factor: 3.054