Electronic Health Risk Behavior Screening With Integrated Feedback Among Adolescents in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Health risk behaviors are the most common sources of morbidity among adolescents. Adolescent health guidelines (Guidelines for Preventive Services by the AMA and Bright Futures by the Maternal Child Health Bureau) recommend screening and counseling, but the implementation is inconsistent.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to test the efficacy of electronic risk behavior screening with integrated patient-facing feedback on the delivery of adolescent-reported clinician counseling and risk behaviors over time.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial comparing an electronic tool to usual care in five pediatric clinics in the Pacific Northwest. A total of 300 participants aged 13-18 years who attended a well-care visit between September 30, 2016, and January 12, 2018, were included. Adolescents were randomized after consent by employing a 1:1 balanced age, sex, and clinic stratified schema with 150 adolescents in the intervention group and 150 in the control group. Intervention adolescents received electronic screening with integrated feedback, and the clinicians received a summary report of the results. Control adolescents received usual care. Outcomes, assessed via online survey methods, included adolescent-reported receipt of counseling during the visit (measured a day after the visit) and health risk behavior change (measured at 3 and 6 months after the visit).
RESULTS: Of the original 300 participants, 94% (n=282), 94.3% (n=283), and 94.6% (n=284) completed follow-up surveys at 1 day, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively, with similar levels of attrition across study arms. The mean risk behavior score at baseline was 2.86 (SD 2.33) for intervention adolescents and 3.10 (SD 2.52) for control adolescents (score potential range 0-21). After adjusting for age, gender, and random effect of the clinic, intervention adolescents were 36% more likely to report having received counseling for endorsed risk behaviors than control adolescents (adjusted rate ratio 1.36, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.78) 1 day after the well-care visit. Both the intervention and control groups reported decreased risk behaviors at the 3- and 6-month follow-up assessments, with no significant group differences in risk behavior scores at either time point (3-month group difference: β=-.15, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.01, P=.05; 6-month group difference: β=-.12, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.52, P=.57).
CONCLUSIONS: Although electronic health screening with integrated feedback improves the delivery of counseling by clinicians, the impact on risk behaviors is modest and, in this study, not significantly different from usual care. More research is needed to identify effective strategies to reduce risk in the context of well-care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02882919; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02882919. ©Laura Richardson, Elizabeth Oshrin Parker, Chuan Zhou, Julie Kientz, Elizabeth Ozer, Carolyn McCarty. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 12.03.2021.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes