A nationwide survey of trauma center information technology leverage capacity for mental health comorbidity screening

Leveraging a health information exchange to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department utilization data among hospitalized injury survivors

Background

Accurate acute care medical utilization history is an important outcome for clinicians and investigators concerned with improving trauma center care. The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy of self-report emergency department (ED) utilization compared with utilization obtained from the Emergency Department Information Exchange (EDIE) in admitted trauma surgery patients with comorbid mental health and substance use problems.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of 169 injured patients admitted to the University of Washington’s Harborview Level I Trauma Center. Patients had high levels of post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation and alcohol comorbidity. The investigation used EDIE, a novel health technology tool that collects information at the time a patient checks into any ED in Washington and other US states. Patterns of EDIE-documented visits were described, and the accuracy of injured patients’ self-report visits was compared with EDIE-recorded visits during the course of the 12 months prior to the index trauma center admission.

Results

Overall, 45% of the sample (n=76) inaccurately recalled their ED visits during the past year, with 36 participants (21%) reporting less ED visits than EDIE indicated and 40 (24%) reporting more ED visits than EDIE indicated. Patients with histories of alcohol use problems and major psychiatric illness were more likely to either under-report or over-report ED health service use.

Discussion

Nearly half of all patients were unable to accurately recall ED visits in the previous 12 months compared with EDIE, with almost one-quarter of patients demonstrating high levels of disagreement. The improved accuracy and ease of use when compared with self-report make EDIE an important tool for both clinical and pragmatic trial longitudinal outcome assessments. Orchestrated investigative and policy efforts could further examine the benefits of introducing EDIE and other information exchanges into routine acute care clinical workflows.

Level of evidence

II/III.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02274688.

The 5th Annual One Mind Summit: Lessons Learned About "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice"

Advances in science frequently precede changes in clinical care by several years or even decades. To better understand the path to translation, we invited experts to share their perspectives at the 5th Annual One Mind Summit: "Science Informing Brain Health Policies and Practice," which was held on May 24-25, 2016, in Crystal City, VA. While the translation of brain research throughout the pipeline-from basic science research to patient care-was discussed, the focus was on the implementation of "best evidence" into patient care. The Summit identified key steps, including the need for professional endorsement and clinical guidelines or policies, acceptance by regulators and payers, dissemination and training for clinicians, patient advocacy, and learning healthcare models. The path to implementation was discussed broadly, as well as in the context of a specific project to implement concussion screening in emergency and urgent care centers throughout the United States.

Technology Use, Preferences, and Capacity in Injured Patients at Risk for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

OBJECTIVE

This investigation comprehensively assessed the technology use, preferences, and capacity of diverse injured trauma survivors with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms.

METHOD

A total of 121 patients participating in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of stepped collaborative care targeting PTSD symptoms were administered baseline one-, three-, and six-month interviews that assessed technology use. Longitudinal data about the instability of patient cell phone ownership and phone numbers were collected from follow-up interviews. PTSD symptoms were also assessed over the course of the six months after injury. Regression analyses explored the associations between cell phone instability and PTSD symptoms.

RESULTS

At baseline, 71.9% (n = 87) of patients reported current cell phone ownership, and over half (58.2%, n = 46) of these patients possessed basic cell phones. Only 19.0% (n = 23) of patients had no change in cell phone number or physical phone over the course of the six months postinjury. In regression models that adjusted for relevant clinical and demographic characteristics, cell phone instability was associated with higher six-month postinjury PTSD symptom levels (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse injured patients at risk for the development of PTSD have unique technology use patterns, including high rates of cell phone instability. These observations should be strongly considered when developing technology-supported interventions for injured patients with PTSD.

An effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial study protocol targeting posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbidity

BACKGROUND

Each year in the USA, 1.5-2.5 million Americans are so severely injured that they require inpatient hospitalization. Multiple conditions including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcohol and drug use problems, depression, and chronic medical conditions are endemic among physical trauma survivors with and without traumatic brain injuries.

METHODS/DESIGN

The trauma survivors outcomes and support (TSOS) effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial is designed to test the delivery of high-quality screening and intervention for PTSD and comorbidities across 24 US level I trauma center sites. The pragmatic trial aims to recruit 960 patients. The TSOS investigation employs a stepped wedge cluster randomized design in which sites are randomized sequentially to initiate the intervention. Patients identified by a 10-domain electronic health record screen as high risk for PTSD are formally assessed with the PTSD Checklist for study entry. Patients randomized to the intervention condition will receive stepped collaborative care, while patients randomized to the control condition will receive enhanced usual care. The intervention training begins with a 1-day on-site workshop in the collaborative care intervention core elements that include care management, medication, cognitive behavioral therapy, and motivational-interviewing elements targeting PTSD and comorbidity. The training is followed by site supervision from the study team. The investigation aims to determine if intervention patients demonstrate significant reductions in PTSD and depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, alcohol consumption, and improvements in physical function when compared to control patients. The study uses implementation science conceptual frameworks to evaluate the uptake of the intervention model. At the completion of the pragmatic trial, results will be presented at an American College of Surgeons' policy summit. Twenty-four representative US level I trauma centers have been selected for the study, and the protocol is being rolled out nationally.

DISCUSSION

The TSOS pragmatic trial simultaneously aims to establish the effectiveness of the collaborative care intervention targeting PTSD and comorbidity while also addressing sustainable implementation through American College of Surgeons' regulatory policy. The TSOS effectiveness-implementation hybrid design highlights the importance of partnerships with professional societies that can provide regulatory mandates targeting enhanced health care system sustainability of pragmatic trial results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02655354 . Registered 27 July 2015.

Technology-Enhanced Stepped Collaborative Care Targeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Comorbidity After Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and its comorbidities are endemic among injured trauma survivors. Previous collaborative care trials targeting PTSD after injury have been effective, but they have required intensive clinical resources. The present pragmatic clinical trial randomized acutely injured trauma survivors who screened positive on an automated electronic medical record PTSD assessment to collaborative care intervention (n = 60) and usual care control (n = 61) conditions. The stepped measurement-based intervention included care management, psychopharmacology, and psychotherapy elements. Embedded within the intervention were a series of information technology (IT) components. PTSD symptoms were assessed with the PTSD Checklist at baseline prerandomization and again, 1-, 3-, and 6-months postinjury. IT utilization was also assessed. The technology-assisted intervention required a median of 2.25 hours (interquartile range = 1.57 hours) per patient. The intervention was associated with modest symptom reductions, but beyond the margin of statistical significance in the unadjusted model: F(2, 204) = 2.95, p = .055. The covariate adjusted regression was significant: F(2, 204) = 3.06, p = .049. The PTSD intervention effect was greatest at the 3-month (Cohen's effect size d = 0.35, F(1, 204) = 4.11, p = .044) and 6-month (d = 0.38, F(1, 204) = 4.10, p = .044) time points. IT-enhanced collaborative care was associated with modest PTSD symptom reductions and reduced delivery times; the intervention model could potentially facilitate efficient PTSD treatment after injury.