Addressing Social Determinants of Health Identified by Systematic Screening in a Medicaid Accountable Care Organization: A Qualitative Study

Meeting The Needs Of Socially Vulnerable Patients: Views Of ACO Leaders On Moving From Intent To Action

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has placed growing emphasis on social drivers of health, but little is known about how accountable care organizations (ACOs) aim to meet the needs of vulnerable patients. During September-December 2022, we interviewed leaders of forty-nine ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). Participants were asked about strategies to identify socially vulnerable patients, programs that addressed their needs, and Medicare reforms that could support their efforts. Seven themes emerged: ACOs were in the early stages of collecting social needs data; leaders were frustrated by an incomplete ability to act on such data; ACOs tended to stratify patients by medical, rather than social, risk; some ACOs have introduced pilot programs to address challenges, including social isolation and drug costs; programs were often payer agnostic; rural ACOs faced unique challenges; and Medicare reforms related to reimbursement, logistical support, quality metrics, and patient benefits could support ACO efforts. These findings suggest that the MSSP alone has not been sufficient to promote consistent investment in social needs provision at most ACOs. Policy makers may want to consider more direct support and incentives for health care organizations, or greater investment in non-health care sectors, to help socially vulnerable patients.

Screening tools for employment in clinical healthcare delivery systems: a content analysis

BACKGROUND

The relationship between work and health is complex and bidirectional, where work can have both health-harming and health-enhancing effects. Though employment is recognized as a social determinant of health, and clinical healthcare delivery systems are increasingly using screening tools to ask patients about social needs, little research has explored the extent to which employment-related social risk is captured in these screening tools. This study aimed to identify and characterize employment- and work-related questions in social risk screening tools that have been implemented in clinical healthcare delivery systems.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative content analysis of employment-related items in screening tools that have been implemented in clinical healthcare service delivery systems. Three content areas guided data extraction and analysis: Setting, Domain, and Level of Contextualization.

RESULTS

Screening tools that asked employment-related questions were implemented in settings that were diverse in the populations served and the scope of care provided. The intent of employment-related items focused on four domains: Social Risk Factor, Social Need, Employment Exposure, and Legal Need. Most questions were found to have a low Level of Contextualization and were largely focused on identifying an individual's employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Several existing screening tools include measures of employment-related social risk, but these items do not have a clear purpose and range widely depending on the setting in which they are implemented. In order to maximize the utility of these tools, clinical healthcare delivery systems should carefully consider what domain(s) they aim to capture and how they anticipate using the screening tools to address social determinants of health.

Social determinants of health correlations and resource usefulness at a Milwaukee free clinic for uninsured individuals: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

Addressing social determinants of health (SDOH) is fundamental to improving health outcomes. At a student-run free clinic, we developed a screening process to understand the SDOH needs and resource utilization of Milwaukee's uninsured population.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we screened adult patients without health insurance (N = 238) for nine traditional SDOH needs as well as their access to dental and mental health care between October 2021 and October 2022. Patients were surveyed at intervals greater than or equal to 30 days. We assessed correlations between SDOH needs and trends in patient-reported resource usefulness.

Results

Access to dental care (64.7%) and health insurance (51.3%) were the most frequently endorsed needs. We found significant correlations (P ≤ 0.05) between various SDOH needs. Notably, mental health access needs significantly correlated with dental (r = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.19, 0.63), medications (r = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.30, 0.72), utilities (r = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.17, 0.61), and food insecurity (r = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.19, 0.64). Food-housing (r = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.32, 0.78), housing-medications (r = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.35, 0.81), and medications-food (r = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.32, 0.74) were significantly correlated with each other. Longitudinal assessment of patient-reported usefulness informed changes in the resources offered.

Conclusions

Understanding prominent SDOH needs can inform resource offerings and interventions, addressing root causes that burden under-resourced patients. In this study, patient-reported data about resource usefulness prompted the curation of new resources and volunteer roles. This proof-of-concept study shows how longitudinally tracking SDOH needs at low-resource clinics can inform psychosocial resources.

Rural Veterans' Experiences with Social Risk Factors: Impacts, Challenges, and Care System Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Social risk factors, such as food insecurity and financial needs, are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, health conditions that are highly prevalent in rural populations. A better understanding of rural Veterans' experiences with social risk factors can inform expansion of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) efforts to address social needs.

OBJECTIVE

To examine social risk and need from rural Veterans' lived experiences and develop recommendations for VHA to address social needs.

DESIGN

We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants purposively sampled for racial diversity. The interview guide was informed by Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use and the Outcomes from Addressing Social Determinants of Health in Systems framework.

PARTICIPANTS

Rural Veterans with or at risk of cardiovascular disease who participated in a parent survey and agreed to be recontacted.

APPROACH

Interviews were recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using directed qualitative content analysis to identify themes.

KEY RESULTS

Interviews (n = 29) took place from March to June 2022. We identified four themes: (1) Social needs can impact access to healthcare, (2) Structural factors can make it difficult to get help for social needs, (3) Some Veterans are reluctant to seek help, and (4) Veterans recommended enhancing resource dissemination and navigation support.

CONCLUSIONS

VHA interventions should include active dissemination of information on social needs resources and navigation support to help Veterans access resources. Community-based organizations (e.g., Veteran Service Organizations) could be key partners in the design and implementation of future social need interventions.

Community Health Center Staff Perspectives on Financial Payments for Social Care

Policy Points State and federal payers are actively considering strategies to increase the adoption of social risk screening and interventions in health care settings, including through the use of financial incentives. Activities related to social care in Oregon community health centers (CHCs) provided a unique opportunity to explore whether and how fee-for-service payments for social risk screening and navigation influence CHC activities. CHC staff, clinicians, and administrative leaders were often unaware of existing financial payments for social risk screening and navigation services. As currently designed, fee-for-service payments are unlikely to strongly influence CHC social care practices.

CONTEXT

A growing crop of national policies has emerged to encourage health care delivery systems to ask about and try to address patients' social risks, e.g., food, housing, and transportation insecurity, in care delivery contexts. In this study, we explored how community health center (CHC) staff perceive the current and potential influence of fee-for-service payments on clinical teams' engagement in these activities.

METHODS

We interviewed 42 clinicians, frontline staff, and administrative leaders from 12 Oregon CHC clinical sites about their social care initiatives, including about the role of existing or anticipated financial payments intended to promote social risk screening and referrals to social services. Data were analyzed using both inductive and deductive thematic analysis approaches.

FINDINGS

We grouped findings into three categories: participants' awareness of existing or anticipated financial incentives, uses for incentive dollars, and perceived impact of financial incentives on social care activities in clinical practices. Lack of awareness of existing incentives meant these incentives were not perceived to influence the behaviors of staff responsible for conducting screening and providing referrals. Current or anticipated meaningful uses for incentive dollars included paying for social care staff, providing social services, and supporting additional fundraising efforts. Frontline staff reported that the strongest motivator for clinic social care practices was the ability to provide responsive social services. Clinic leaders/managers noted that for financial incentives to substantively change CHC practices would require payments sizable enough to expand the social care workforce as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Small fee-for-service payments to CHCs for social risk screening and navigation services are unlikely to markedly influence CHC social care practices. Refining the design of financial incentives-e.g., by increasing clinical teams' awareness of incentives, linking screening to well-funded social services, and changing incentive amounts to support social care staffing needs-may increase the uptake of social care practices in CHCs.

A model of care for patients with low income

ABSTRACT

Barriers to patient-centered care for patients with low income include lack of provider comfort, time, and education. The USA Model addresses these issues by providing a simple framework for increasing provider understanding, screening for poverty and social determinants of health (SDoH) if indicated, and adjusting the plan of care to address SDoH.

Social Risk Screening and Response Equity: Assessment by Race, Ethnicity, and Language in Community Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

Little has previously been reported about the implementation of social risk screening across racial/ethnic/language groups. To address this knowledge gap, the associations between race/ethnicity/language, social risk screening, and patient-reported social risks were examined among adult patients at community health centers.

METHODS

Patient- and encounter-level data from 2016 to 2020 from 651 community health centers in 21 U.S. states were used; data were extracted from a shared Epic electronic health record and analyzed between December 2020 and February 2022. In adjusted logistic regression analyses stratified by language, robust sandwich variance SE estimators were applied with clustering on patient's primary care facility.

RESULTS

Social risk screening occurred at 30% of health centers; 11% of eligible adult patients were screened. Screening and reported needs varied significantly by race/ethnicity/language. Black Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic patients were approximately twice as likely to be screened, and Hispanic White patients were 28% less likely to be screened than non-Hispanic White patients. Hispanic Black patients were 87% less likely to report social risks than non-Hispanic White patients. Among patients who preferred a language other than English or Spanish, Black Hispanic patients were 90% less likely to report social needs than non-Hispanic White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Social risk screening documentation and patient reports of social risks differed by race/ethnicity/language in community health centers. Although social care initiatives are intended to promote health equity, inequitable screening practices could inadvertently undermine this goal. Future implementation research should explore strategies for equitable screening and related interventions.

Pediatric primary care provider and staff perspectives on the implementation of electronic health record-based social needs interventions: A mixed-methods study

Introduction

Interventions to address social needs in clinical settings can improve child and family health outcomes. Electronic health record (EHR) tools are available to support these interventions but are infrequently used. This mixed-methods study sought to identify approaches for implementing social needs interventions using an existing EHR module in pediatric primary care.

Methods

We conducted focus groups and interviews with providers and staff (n = 30) and workflow assessments (n = 48) at four pediatric clinics. Providers and staff completed measures assessing the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of social needs interventions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the study. A hybrid deductive-inductive approach was used to analyze qualitative data.

Results

Median scores (range 1-5) for acceptability (4.9) and appropriateness (5.0) were higher than feasibility (3.9). Perceived barriers to implementation related to duplicative processes, parent disclosure, and staffing limitations. Facilitators included the relative advantage of the EHR module compared to existing documentation practices, importance of addressing social needs, and compatibility with clinic culture and workflow. Self-administered screening was seen as inappropriate for sensitive topics. Strategies identified included providing resource lists, integrating social needs assessments with existing screening questionnaires, and reducing duplicative documentation.

Conclusions

This study offers insight into the implementation of EHR-based social needs interventions and identifies strategies to promote intervention uptake. Findings highlight the need to design interventions that are feasible to implement in real-world settings. Future work should focus on integrating multiple stakeholder perspectives to inform the development of EHR tools and clinical workflows to support social needs interventions.

"Addressing the bigger picture": A qualitative study of internal medicine patients' perspectives on social needs data collection and use

BACKGROUND

There is increasing interest in collecting sociodemographic and social needs data in hospital settings to inform patient care and health equity. However, few studies have examined inpatients' views on this data collection and what should be done to address social needs. This study describes internal medicine inpatients' perspectives on the collection and use of sociodemographic and social needs information.

METHODS

A qualitative interpretive description methodology was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 patients admitted to a large academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Participants were recruited using maximum variation sampling for diverse genders, races, and those with and without social needs. Interviews were coded using a predominantly inductive approach and a thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Patients expressed that sociodemographic and social needs data collection is important to offer actionable solutions to address their needs. Patients described a gap between their ideal care which would attend to social needs, versus the reality that hospital-based teams are faced with competing priorities and pressures that make it unfeasible to provide such care. They also believed that this data collection could facilitate more holistic, integrated care. Patients conveyed a need to have a trusting and transparent relationship with their provider to alleviate concerns surrounding bias, discrimination, and confidentiality. Lastly, they indicated that sociodemographic and social needs data could be useful to inform care, support research to inspire social change, and assist them with navigating community resources or creating in-hospital programs to address unmet social needs.

CONCLUSIONS

While the collection of sociodemographic and social needs information in hospital settings is generally acceptable, there were varied views on whether hospital staff should intervene, as their priority is medical care. The results can inform the implementation of social data collection and interventions in hospital settings.

Assessment of the Massachusetts Flexible Services Program to Address Food and Housing Insecurity in a Medicaid Accountable Care Organization

Importance

Health systems are increasingly addressing health-related social needs. The Massachusetts Flexible Services program (Flex) is a 3-year pilot program to address food insecurity and housing insecurity by connecting Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) enrollees to community resources.

Objective

To understand barriers and facilitators of Flex implementation in 1 Medicaid ACO during the first 17 months of the program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This mixed-methods qualitative evaluation study from March 2020 to July 2021 used the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance/Practical, Robust Implementation, and Sustainability Model (RE-AIM/PRISM) framework. Two Mass General Brigham (MGB) hospitals and affiliated community health centers were included in the analysis. Quantitative data included all MGB Medicaid ACO enrollees. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 members of ACO staff and 17 Flex enrollees.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reach was assessed by the proportion of ACO enrollees who completed annual social needs screening (eg, food insecurity and housing insecurity) and the proportion and demographics of Flex enrollees. Qualitative interviews examined other RE-AIM/PRISM constructs (eg, implementation challenges, facilitators, and perceived effectiveness).

Results

Of 67 098 Medicaid ACO enrollees from March 2020 to July 2021 (mean [SD] age, 28.8 [18.7] years), 38 442 (57.3%) completed at least 1 social needs screening; 10 730 (16.0%) screened positive for food insecurity, and 7401 (11.0%) screened positive for housing insecurity. There were 658 (1.6%) adults (mean [SD] age, 46.6 [11.8] years) and 173 (0.7%) children (<21 years; mean [SD] age, 10.1 [5.5]) enrolled in Flex; of these 831 people, 613 (73.8%) were female, 444 (53.4%) were Hispanic/Latinx, and 172 (20.7%) were Black. Most Flex enrollees (584 [88.8%] adults; 143 [82.7%] children) received the intended nutrition or housing services. Implementation challenges identified by staff interviewed included administrative burden, coordination with community organizations, data-sharing and information-sharing, and COVID-19 factors (eg, reduced clinical visits). Implementation facilitators included administrative funding for enrollment staff, bidirectional communication with community partners, adaptive strategies to identify eligible patients, and raising clinician awareness of Flex. In Flex enrollee interviews, those receiving nutrition services reported increased healthy eating and food security; they also reported higher program satisfaction than Flex enrollees receiving housing services. Enrollees who received nutrition services that allowed for selecting food based on preferences reported higher satisfaction than those not able to select food.

Conclusions and Relevance

This mixed-methods qualitative evaluation study found that to improve implementation, Medicaid and health system programs that address social needs may benefit from providing funding for administrative costs, developing bidirectional data-sharing platforms, and tailoring support to patient preferences.

Patients' Willingness to Accept Social Needs Navigation After In-Person versus Remote Screening

BACKGROUND

Social needs screening and referral interventions are increasingly common in health care settings. Although remote screening offers a potentially more practical alternative to traditional in-person screening, there is concern that screening patients remotely could adversely affect patient engagement, including interest in accepting social needs navigation.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using a multivariable logistic regression analysis and data from the Accountable Health Communities (AHC) model in Oregon. Participants were Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries in the AHC model from October 2018 through December 2020. The outcome variable was patients' willingness to accept social needs navigation assistance. We included an interaction term (total number of social needs + screening mode) to test whether in-person versus remote screening was an effect modifier.

RESULTS

The study included participants who screened positive for ≥1 social need(s); 43% were screened in person and 57% remotely. Overall, 71% of participants were willing to accept help with social needs. Neither screening mode nor interaction term were significantly associated with willingness to accept navigation assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients presenting with similar numbers of social needs, results indicate that type of screening mode may not adversely affect patients' willingness to accept health care-based navigation for social needs.

Physician awareness of social determinants of health documentation capability in the electronic health record

Healthcare organizations are increasing social determinants of health (SDH) screening and documentation in the electronic health record (EHR). Physicians may use SDH data for medical decision-making and to provide referrals to social care resources. Physicians must be aware of these data to use them, however, and little is known about physicians' awareness of EHR-based SDH documentation or documentation capabilities. We therefore leveraged national physician survey data to measure level of awareness and variation by physician, practice, and EHR characteristics to inform practice- and policy-based efforts to drive medical-social care integration. We identify higher levels of social needs documentation awareness among physicians practicing in community health centers, those participating in payment models with social care initiatives, and those aware of other advanced EHR functionalities. Findings indicate that there are opportunities to improve physician education and training around new EHR-based SDH functionalities.

"It Made Me Feel like Things Are Starting to Change in Society:" A Qualitative Study to Foster Positive Patient Experiences during Phone-Based Social Needs Interventions

Many healthcare organizations are screening patients for health-related social needs (HRSN) to improve healthcare quality and outcomes. Due to both the COVID-19 pandemic and limited time during clinical visits, much of this screening is now happening by phone. To promote healing and avoid harm, it is vital to understand patient experiences and recommendations regarding these activities. We conducted a pragmatic qualitative study with patients who had participated in a HRSN intervention. We applied maximum variation sampling, completed recruitment and interviews by phone, and carried out an inductive reflexive thematic analysis. From August to November 2021 we interviewed 34 patients, developed 6 themes, and used these themes to create a framework for generating positive patient experiences during phone-based HRSN interventions. First, we found patients were likely to have initial skepticism or reservations about the intervention. Second, we identified 4 positive intervention components regarding patient experience: transparency and respect for patient autonomy; kind demeanor; genuine intention to help; and attentiveness and responsiveness to patients' situations. Finally, we found patients could be left with feelings of appreciation or hope, regardless of whether they connected with HRSN resources. Healthcare organizations can incorporate our framework into trainings for team members carrying out phone-based HRSN interventions.

Implementation of a Pediatric Population Health Asthma Program in Academic Medical Center-Affiliated Urban and Suburban Practices

A tiered pediatric Asthma Population Health Management Program (APHMP), based on evidence-based practices, that differentially targets populations for intervention based on rising risk for high utilization and disease complications was implemented at 6 urban and suburban practices affiliated with an academic medical center. In addition to standard pediatric asthma care, APHMP adds regular administration of the asthma control test (ACT), provider education on performance variation, and monitoring through the electronic health record-based asthma registry. As patients' use of acute health care services and complications increases, APHMP integrates multidisciplinary interventions, including an asthma coach who conducts environmental assessments in addition to addressing social needs, into their primary care. A retrospective cohort study method was used to assess population-level effects on asthma event rates and practice- and provider-level variation from 2017 to 2019. Consistent with well-documented health disparities in pediatric asthma, the analysis demonstrated that patients who were male (odds ratio [OR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.43), 4-8 years old (OR = 4.91, 95% CI = 3.27-7.37), Spanish speaking (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.54-1.81), from low-income neighborhoods (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.53-2.46), and with ACT <20 (OR = 2.88, 95% CI = 1.97-4.21) had higher odds of having asthma events. Six percent of patients studied were found to be at risk for high health care utilization and disease complications. Study limitations include the absence of a control group, the mixed model data collection approach, and the effects of seasonal variation on asthma events. Future directions include analyzing disease management program outcomes of incorporating an asthma coach into a patient's primary care team and addressing provider-level variation in asthma event rates.

Procurement and use of social determinants of health data among key health care stakeholders

BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence supports the need for health systems to shift towards addressing social determinants of health (SDoH) as part of routine care. However, little is known about the state of the industry in terms of procurement and use of SDoH data. OBJECTIVES: To assess stakeholders' perceptions and experiences in collecting and utilizing SDoH data. METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted using a 24-item electronic survey. The pilot-tested survey was distributed to a diverse convenience sample of 94 health care stakeholder organizations that are members of the Pharmacy Quality Alliance organization. Survey responses were collected from November to December 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. RESULTS: A total of 25 respondents completed the survey (response rate = 26.6%). More than half (n = 14, 56.0%) collected and tracked SDoH data, and of those, most (n = 6, 42.85%) reported using organization-specific tools instead of standardized SDoH tools. Economic stability and health and health care indicators were the most frequently identified types of SDoH data collected. Participants reported that both identifying (mean = 3.88 ± SD = 0.88; 1 = not important to 5 = extremely important) and addressing (3.88 ± 0.93) patients' SDoH were moderately important to their organization. Lack of standard data format (72.0%), lack of time (52.0%), and lack of technological capabilities (44.0%) were the most commonly reported barriers to collecting SDoH data. However, value-based payment programs that reward addressing SDoH needs (76.0%) and a coding structure or reimbursement mechanism for identification and management of SDoH (60.0%) were most commonly reported as mechanisms to overcome SDoH data collection barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Health care stakeholders consider patient SDoH indicators important but report significant challenges in collecting these data. Solutions that address data standardization, time burden, technological barriers, and the offering of incentives could facilitate its collection and effective use. DISCLOSURES: Pharmacy Quality Alliance received an unrestricted grant from Pfizer, Inc, to support this work.

Screening for Social Risk at Federally Qualified Health Centers: A National Study

INTRODUCTION

Federally Qualified Health Centers serve 29.8 million low-income patients across the U.S., many of whom have unaddressed social risks. In 2019, for the first time, data on social risk screening capabilities were collected from every U.S. Federally Qualified Health Center. The objectives of this study were to describe the national rates of social risk screening capabilities across Federally Qualified Health Centers, identify organizational predictors of screening, and assess between-state heterogeneity.

METHODS

Using a 100% sample of U.S. Federally Qualified Health Centers (N=1,384, representing 29.8 million patients) from the 2019 Uniform Data System, the primary outcome was whether a Federally Qualified Health Center collected data on patients' social risk factors (yes/no). Summary statistics on the rates of social risk screening capabilities were generated in aggregate and by state. Linear probability models were then used to estimate the relationship between the probability of social risk screening and 7 key Federally Qualified Health Center characteristics (e.g., Federally Qualified Health Center size, Medicaid MCO contract, Medicaid accountable care organization presence). Data were analyzed in 2020‒2021.

RESULTS

Most (71%) Federally Qualified Health Centers collected social risk data, with a between-state variation. The most common screener was the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Assets Risks and Experiences (43% of Federally Qualified Health Centers that screened), whereas 22% collected social risk data using a nonstandardized screener. After adjusting for other characteristics, Federally Qualified Health Centers with social risk screening capabilities served more total patients, were more likely to be located in a state with a Medicaid accountable care organization, and were less likely to have an MCO contract.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been widespread adoption of social risk screening tools across U.S. Federally Qualified Health Centers, but between-state disparities exist. Targeting social risk screening resources to smaller Federally Qualified Health Centers may increase the adoption of screening tools.

Implementing Health Related Social Needs Screening in an Outpatient Clinic

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Health-related social needs (HRSN) screening efforts have reported high rates of identified social needs. Little is known if efforts to conduct HRSN screening in resource-constrained federally-qualified health centers (FQHC) successfully captures a representative patient population.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study extracted EMR data from 2016 to 2020 for 4731 screened patients from 7 affiliated clinics of a FQHC. Unscreened patients were pulled as a random sample from the study period. A multivariable logistic regression was used to identify sociodemographic traits, chronic disease diagnoses and burden, and clinic visit type and frequency associated with being screened for HRSN.

RESULTS

BHC screened 4731 unique patients or <1% of the total clinic population. Screened patients had a median of 3.3 (±2.5) unmet HRSN. Medicaid patients had higher odds of being screened (aOR = 1.38, CI 1.19-1.61) relative to Medicare patients. The odds of being screened for social needs increased with more provider visits per year: compared to fewer than 1 visit per year, patients with 1 to 3 provider visits (aOR = 2.06, CI 1.73-2.32), 4 to 6 provider visits (aOR = 3.34, CI 2.89-3.87), and more than 6 provider visits (aOR = 5.16, CI 4.35-6.12) all had higher odds of social needs screening. Patients with a higher comorbid disease burden (>2 conditions, aOR = 2.80, CI 2.07-3.79) had higher odds of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate an increased likelihood to screen patients who visit outpatient services more often and have a higher comorbid disease burden. To meet state-level Medicaid requirements, resource-constrained FQHCs that implement clinic wide HRSN screening may be well served to identify a priori strategies to ensure representative and equitable screening across the patient population.

Implementation of social needs screening in primary care: a qualitative study using the health equity implementation framework

BACKGROUND

Screening in primary care for unmet individual social needs (e.g., housing instability, food insecurity, unemployment, social isolation) is critical to addressing their deleterious effects on patients' health outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first study to apply an implementation science framework to identify implementation factors and best practices for social needs screening and response.

METHODS

Guided by the Health Equity Implementation Framework (HEIF), we collected qualitative data from clinicians and patients to evaluate barriers and facilitators to implementing the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Assets, Risks, and Experiences (PRAPARE), a standardized social needs screening and response protocol, in a federally qualified health center. Eligible patients who received the PRAPARE as a standard of care were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. We also obtained front-line clinician perspectives in a semi-structured focus group. HEIF domains informed a directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Patients and clinicians (i.e., case managers) reported implementation barriers and facilitators across multiple domains (e.g., clinical encounters, patient and provider factors, inner context, outer context, and societal influence). Implementation barriers included structural and policy level determinants related to resource availability, discrimination, and administrative burden. Facilitators included evidence-based clinical techniques for shared decision making (e.g., motivational interviewing), team-based staffing models, and beliefs related to alignment of the PRAPARE with patient-centered care. We found high levels of patient acceptability and opportunities for adaptation to increase equitable adoption and reach.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide practical insight into the implementation of the PRAPARE or similar social needs screening and response protocols in primary care at the individual encounter, organizational, community, and societal levels. Future research should focus on developing discrete implementation strategies to promote social needs screening and response, and associated multisector care coordination to improve health outcomes and equity for vulnerable and marginalized patient populations.

Workforce Models to Screen for and Address Patients' Unmet Social Needs in the Clinic Setting: A Scoping Review

Objectives

While healthcare organizations increasingly aim to address the social determinants of health (SDOH) in the clinic setting, there is little guidance on which staff are best equipped to assume this role. The present study is a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature to characterize workforce models used to screen for and respond to patients’ unmet social needs in ambulatory settings.

Methods

Four online databases were used to identify papers published until February 2021. Eligible articles were original research studies or systematic reviews that described the implementation of a standardized assessment for multiple SDOH domains and resulting activities to respond to individual patient needs (eg, referral to community resources) in ambulatory care settings.

Results

Of the 1569 articles identified, 65 met study eligibility criteria. Majority of studies had observational study designs (11% were randomized control trials). For screening-related activities, more articles reported using traditional healthcare staff (51%), such as medical providers, medical assistants, and front-desk staff, than social care staff (32%), such as social workers and student volunteers. In contrast, for response-related activities, more articles reported using social care staff (88%) than traditional healthcare staff (60%). While we found wide variations in specific team configurations and training for the roles, social care staff generally provided more intensive forms of assistance than traditional healthcare staff.

Conclusion

While this review demonstrates the breadth of models for building or deploying a workforce to integrate health and social care, it also identifies the need for rigorous research on workforce development, implementation, and effectiveness.

Experiences and Perspectives on Adopting New Practices for Social Needs-targeted Care in Safety-net Settings: A Qualitative Case Series Study

INTRODUCTION

Clinical settings are being encouraged to identify and address patients' social needs within the clinic or through partner organizations. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the current practice of social needs-targeted care in 3 Texas safety net clinics, and facilitators and barriers to adopting new social needs-targeted care tools and practices.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with staff at 3 safety net clinics serving small and mid-sized communities. Analysis focused on perspectives and decisions around adopting new tools or practices related to social needs-targeted care, including standardized screening tools and community resource referral platforms.

RESULTS

Nine staff across 3 organizations were interviewed. Two organizations were currently using a standard social needs screening tool in their routine practice, and a third was considering doing so. One organization had adopted a community resource referral platform in partnership with a large community collaboration. Three case studies illustrate a range of facilitators, barriers, perceived benefits, and drawbacks influencing social needs-targeted practices. Benefits of systematic data collection on social needs included the generation of data for community action. Drawbacks include concerns about data privacy. Community resource referral platforms were seen as valuable for creating accountability, but required an influential community partner and adequate community resources. Concerns about disempowering clients and blurring roles were voiced, and potential to increase provider job satisfaction was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefits and drawbacks of adopting new tools and practices related to social needs-targeted care are strongly influenced by the community context. For the adoption of community resource referral platforms, the outer setting is particularly relevant; adoption readiness is best assessed at the community or regional level rather than the clinic system level. While screening tools are much easier than referral platforms for clinics to adopt, the ability to address identified needs remains heavily based on the outer setting.