Increasing Recognition and Diagnosis of Adolescent Depression: Project RedDE: A Cluster Randomized Trial

E-learning Interventions for Quality Improvement Continuing Medical Education-A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Improving health care quality and patient safety are top priorities for the medical field. Robust continuing medical education (CME) programs represent major interventions to effectively teach quality improvement (QI) principles to practicing physicians. In particular, eLearning, a term describing online and distance learning interventions using digital tools, provides a means for CME interventions to reach broader audiences. Although there has been a focus on CME addressing QI, no knowledge synthesis has focused specifically on eLearning interventions. The purpose of this review was to examine the current landscape of eLearning interventions in QI-focused CME.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review using the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley as revised by Levac. We searched five databases and identified 2467 prospective publications, which two authors independently screened for inclusion. From each included article, two authors independently extracted data on the instructional modalities and QI tools used and met regularly to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included. Most studies used blended instruction (n = 12) rather than solely eLearning interventions. Salient findings included the importance of coaching from QI experts and institutional support for planning and implementing eLearning interventions. Lack of protected time and resources for participants were identified as barriers to participation in CME activities, with small practices being disproportionately affected.

DISCUSSION

Partnerships between CME developers and sponsoring organizations are vital in creating sustainable eLearning interventions for QI-focused CME. Remote coaching can be an effective strategy to provide ongoing support to geographically separated learners.

Screening for depression in children and adolescents in primary care or non-mental health settings: a systematic review update

BACKGROUND

The transition from childhood to adolescence is associated with an increase in rates of some psychiatric disorders, including major depressive disorder, a debilitating mood disorder. The aim of this systematic review is to update the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for depression in primary care and non-mental health clinic settings among children and adolescents.

METHODS

This review is an update of a previous systematic review, for which the last search was conducted in 2017. We searched Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Embase Classic+Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL on November 4, 2019, and updated on February 19, 2021. If no randomized controlled trials were found, we planned to conduct an additional search for non-randomized trials with a comparator group. For non-randomized trials, we applied a non-randomized controlled trial filter and searched the same databases except for Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2015 to February 2021. We also conducted a targeted search of the gray literature for unpublished documents. Title and abstract, and full-text screening were completed independently by pairs of reviewers.

RESULTS

In this review update, we were unable to find any randomized controlled studies that satisfied our eligibility criteria and evaluated the potential benefits and harms of screening for depression in children and adolescents. Additionally, a search for non-randomized trials yielded no studies that met the inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review indicate a lack of available evidence regarding the potential benefits and harms of screening for depression in children and adolescents. This absence of evidence emphasizes the necessity for well-conducted clinical trials to evaluate the effectiveness of depression screening among children and adolescents in primary care and non-mental health clinic settings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020150373 .

Improving Adolescent Depression in Primary Care: A Quality Improvement Initiative

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has exacerbated and increased the prevalence of depression in adolescents. There is significant evidence supporting best practices for treating adolescent depression; yet, many adolescents remain unidentified or untreated by their primary care provider. For this quality improvement initiative, the Guidelines for Adolescent Depression in Primary Care (GLAD-PC) were implemented in a primary care setting. After GLAD-PC implementation, 90% of participants identified as having depression received an intervention compared with 60% of patients in the baseline group. The results showed that implementing GLAD-PC led to a significant increase in the treatment of adolescent depression in primary care.

Interventions to improve the detection of depression in primary healthcare: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several studies have been conducted on the effect of interventions on the detection of depression in primary healthcare (PHC). Systematic reviews have also been done on the effectiveness of separate interventions. However, systematic reviews are not done on the comparative effectiveness of several interventions. This study, therefore, aimed at synthesizing the global evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to improve the detection of depression in PHC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Global Index Medicus, African Index Medicus, and African Journals Online, from the inception of the databases to until the 4th week of April 2020. We also searched references of the included articles. We included randomized trials, cluster randomized trials, or quasi-experimental studies, which evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention to improve detection of depression in the PHC setting. Two of the review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project. The protocol for the review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020166291).

RESULTS

Of 23,305 records identified, we included 58 articles in the review. Diverse types of interventions were evaluated to improve clinician diagnosis of depression in the PHC setting. Interventions related to implementation of guidelines, screening with feedback, educational interventions which incorporated active learning and clinical practice, and disclosure of screening results were found to be mostly effective. Interventions which combined education, screening, and feedback were particularly more effective. Most of the included studies were weak or moderate in their methodological quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review indicates that implementation of a single type of intervention does not improve the detection of depression in PHC. Combining aspects of each type of intervention which are more effective may be useful. Education and training interventions which include more simulation and role playing are found to be effective over time. Most of the studies conducted in the area are from high-income countries and are weak in their methodological quality. There is need to conduct more number of studies in low-income settings.

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Children and Adolescents: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

Depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm behaviors in youth are associated with functional impairment and suicide.

Objective

To review the evidence on screening for depression or suicide risk in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

Data Sources

PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and trial registries through July 19, 2021; references, experts, and surveillance through June 1, 2022.

Study Selection

English-language, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening for depression or suicide risk; diagnostic test accuracy studies; RCTs of psychotherapy and first-line pharmacotherapy; RCTs, observational studies, and systematic reviews reporting harms.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Test accuracy, symptoms, response, remission, loss of diagnosis, mortality, functioning, suicide-related events, and adverse events.

Results

Twenty-one studies (N = 5433) were included for depression and 19 studies (N = 6290) for suicide risk. For depression, no studies reported on the direct effects of screening on health outcomes, and 7 studies (n = 3281) reported sensitivity of screening instruments ranging from 0.59 to 0.94 and specificity from 0.38 to 0.96. Depression treatment with psychotherapy was associated with improved symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory pooled standardized mean difference, -0.58 [95% CI, -0.83 to -0.34]; n = 471; 4 studies; and Hamilton Depression Scale pooled mean difference, -2.25 [95% CI, -4.09 to -0.41]; n = 262; 3 studies) clinical response (3 studies with statistically significant results using varying thresholds), and loss of diagnosis (relative risk, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.00 to 3.00; n = 395; 4 studies). Pharmacotherapy was associated with improvement on symptoms (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised mean difference, -3.76 [95% CI, -5.95 to -1.57; n = 793; 3 studies), remission (relative risk, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45]; n = 793; 3 studies) and functioning (Children's Global Assessment Scale pooled mean difference, 2.60 (95% CI, 0.78 to 4.42; n = 793; 3 studies). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different. Differences in suicide-related outcomes and adverse events for pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo were not statistically significant. For suicide risk, no studies reported on the direct benefits of screening on health outcomes, and 2 RCTs (n = 2675) reported no harms of screening. One study (n = 581) reported on sensitivity of screening, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91; specificity was 0.60. Sixteen RCTs (n = 3034) reported on suicide risk interventions. Interventions were associated with lower scores for the Beck Hopelessness Scale (pooled mean difference, -2.35 [95% CI, -4.06 to -0.65]; n = 644; 4 RCTs). Findings for other suicide-related outcomes were mixed or not statistically significantly different.

Conclusion and Relevance

Indirect evidence suggested that some screening instruments were reasonably accurate for detecting depression. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy were associated with some benefits and no statistically significant harms for depression, but the evidence was limited for suicide risk screening instruments and interventions.

Diagnostic Error in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review

A priority topic for patient safety research is diagnostic errors. However, despite the significant growth in awareness of their unacceptably high incidence and associated harm, a relative paucity of large, high-quality studies of diagnostic error in pediatrics exists. In this narrative review, we present what is known about the incidence and epidemiology of diagnostic error in pediatrics as well as the established research methods for identifying, evaluating, and reducing diagnostic errors, including their strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, we highlight that pediatric diagnostic error remains an area in need of both innovative research and quality improvement efforts to apply learnings from a rapidly growing evidence base. We propose several key research questions aimed at addressing persistent gaps in the pediatric diagnostic error literature that focus on the foundational knowledge needed to inform effective interventions to reduce the incidence of diagnostic errors and their associated harm. Additional research is needed to better establish the epidemiology of diagnostic error in pediatrics, including identifying high-risk clinical scenarios, patient populations, and groups of diagnoses. A critical need exists for validated measures of both diagnostic errors and diagnostic processes that can be adapted for different clinical settings and standardized for use across varying institutions. Pediatric researchers will need to work collaboratively on large-scale, high-quality studies to accomplish the ultimate goal of reducing diagnostic errors and their associated harm in children by addressing these fundamental gaps in knowledge.

Contributing Factors for Pediatric Ambulatory Diagnostic Process Errors: Project RedDE

BACKGROUND

Pediatric ambulatory diagnostic errors (DEs) occur frequently. We used root cause analyses (RCAs) to identify their failure points and contributing factors.

METHODS

Thirty-one practices were enrolled in a national QI collaborative to reduce 3 DEs occurring at different stages of the diagnostic process: missed adolescent depression, missed elevated blood pressure (BP), and missed actionable laboratory values. Practices were encouraged to perform monthly "mini-RCAs" to identify failure points and prioritize interventions. Information related to process steps involved, specific contributing factors, and recommended interventions were reported monthly. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pareto charts.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight (90%) practices submitted 184 mini-RCAs. The median number of mini-RCAs submitted was 6 (interquartile range, 2-9). For missed adolescent depression, the process step most commonly identified was the failure to screen (68%). For missed elevated BP, it was the failure to recognize (36%) and act on (28%) abnormal BP. For missed actionable laboratories, failure to notify families (23%) and document actions on (19%) abnormal results were the process steps most commonly identified. Top contributing factors to missed adolescent depression included patient volume (16%) and inadequate staffing (13%). Top contributing factors to missed elevated BP included patient volume (12%), clinic milieu (9%), and electronic health records (EHRs) (8%). Top contributing factors to missed actionable laboratories included written communication (13%), EHR (9%), and provider knowledge (8%). Recommended interventions were similar across errors.

CONCLUSIONS

EHR-based interventions, standardization of processes, and cross-training may help decrease DEs in the pediatric ambulatory setting. Mini-RCAs are useful tools to identify their contributing factors and interventions.