The prevention access and risk taking in young people (PARTY) project protocol: a cluster randomised controlled trial of health risk screening and motivational interviewing for young people presenting to general practice

Towards a health promoting university: descriptive findings on health, wellbeing and academic performance amongst university students in Australia

BACKGROUND

Universities are increasingly recognised as institutions where health and wellbeing can be promoted to maximise academic outcomes, career transitions, and lifelong positive health behaviours. There is concern about the mental health of university students and other factors which affect academic outcomes particularly for subgroups such as international students. There are few cohort studies of the breadth of issues that can impact on mental health and academic outcomes for both local and international students. We conducted a baseline prevalence survey of students at a large Australian university covering health, academic, and social determinants of wellbeing. The purpose was to inform the university's new student health and wellbeing framework with a view to follow-up to determine predictors of mental ill-health and academic outcomes in the subsequent year. In this paper we present the baseline prevalence data and report on selected mental health and health care access issues for local and international students.

METHODS

The entire university population as of April 2019 of over 56,375 students aged 18 or above were invited to complete the online survey. Questions explored eight domains: demographic characteristics, general health and wellbeing, mental health, risk taking behaviours, psychosocial stressors, learning and academic factors, social and cultural environment, and awareness of and access to health and wellbeing services. Records of academic results were also accessed and matched with survey data for a large subset of students providing consent.

RESULTS

Fourteen thousand eight hundred eighty (26.4%) students commenced our survey and were representative of the entire student population on demographic characteristics. Three quarters were aged between 18 to 25 years and one third were international students. Eighty-five percent consented to access of their academic records. Similar proportions of local and international students experienced symptoms of a depression or anxiety disorder, however international students were less aware of and less likely to access available health services both inside and external to the university. We also reported on the prevalence of: general lifestyle factors (diet, exercise, amount of daily sleep); risk-taking behaviours (including alcohol, tobacco and other drug use; unprotected sexual activity); psychosocial stressors (financial, intimate partner violence, discrimination, academic stressors, acculturative stress); subjects failed; resilience; social supports; social media use; and health services accessed online.

CONCLUSIONS

This rigorous and comprehensive examination of the health status of local and international students in an Australian university student population establishes the prevalence of mental health issues and other psychosocial determinants of health and wellbeing, along with academic performance. This study will inform a university-wide student wellbeing framework to guide health and wellbeing promotion and is a baseline for a 12-month follow-up of the cohort in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Implementing the Routine Use of Electronic Mental Health Screening for Youth in Primary Care: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Adolescents often present at primary care clinics with nonspecific physical symptoms when, in fact, they have at least 1 mental health or risk behavior (psychosocial) issue with which they would like help but do not disclose to their care provider. Despite global recommendations, over 50% of youths are not screened for mental health and risk behavior issues in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to examine the implementation, acceptability, feasibility, benefits, and barriers of e-screening tools for mental health and risk behaviors among youth in primary care settings.

METHODS

Electronic databases-MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews-were searched for studies on the routine screening of youth in primary care settings. Screening tools needed to be electronic and screen for at least 1 mental health or risk behavior issue. A total of 11 studies that were reported in 12 articles, of which all were from high-income countries, were reviewed.

RESULTS

e-Screening was largely proven to be feasible and acceptable to youth and their primary care providers. Preconsultation e-screening facilitated discussions about sensitive issues and increased disclosure by youth. However, barriers such as the lack of time, training, and discomfort in raising sensitive issues with youth continued to be reported.

CONCLUSIONS

To implement e-screening, clinicians need to change their behaviors, and e-screening processes must become normalized into their workflows. Co-designing and tailoring screening implementation frameworks to meet the needs of specific contexts may be required to ensure that clinicians overcome initial resistances and perceived barriers and adopt the required processes in their work.

Previsit Multidomain Psychosocial Screening Tools for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review

Adolescence and young adulthood constitute a period when exploratory behaviors can evolve into risky behaviors. Most causes of adolescent ill health are preventable; therefore, it is a priority to detect them early before they turn into health problems. Previsit multidomain psychosocial screening tools are used by professionals to detect and prioritize potentially problematic issues. In conjunction with appropriate clinician training, these tools have improved clinician screening rates in several areas of adolescent health. This article reviews existing multidomain previsit psychosocial screening tools developed in the 21st century and describes their characteristics using a systematic methodology. We reviewed 10,623 records to identify 15 different tools in use since 2000 and described their characteristics. Results show that all tools were developed in high-income countries. The tools provide sufficient coverage of many psychosocial domains relevant to young people's health. However, some psychosocial domains such as screen use and strengths are seldomly addressed. Furthermore, the tools rarely focus on young adults as a target population. Future research should assess the effectiveness, acceptability, and psychometric properties of validated psychosocial screening tools and examine how to expand their use in low- and middle-income countries.

Health-Risk Behaviours and Injuries among Youth and Young Adults in Chiang Mai, Thailand: A Population-Based Survey

This study aimed to identify the prevalence of health-risk behaviours (alcohol use, tobacco smoking and gambling) and the associations between health-risk behaviours and injuries among youth (15–24 years) and young adults (25–39 years). A multi-stage cluster sampling survey was conducted in Chiang Mai, Thailand. The associations between health-risk behaviours and injuries were analysed using logistic regression and adjusted for potential confounders. Sample weights were applied in all analyses. Six-hundred-and-thirty participants were included. Fifty-three percent of males and 12.3% of females drank in the past three months. Smoking in the past three months was higher among males (38.5%) than females (0.7%). About a quarter of men and a fifth of the women had gambled in the past year. A total of 6.4% of males and 4.8% of females sought medical attention in the past year due to injuries. Compared to those without any of the three health-risk behaviours, the odds ratio for injuries requiring medical attention was 3.81 (95% CI: 1.33 to 10.90, p = 0.013) for those with two health-risk behaviours and 13.8 (95% CI: 4.24 to 45.10, p < 0.001) for those with all three health-risk behaviours. Injury prevention policies may need to incorporate interventions designed to assess multiple health-risk behaviours.

YouthCHAT as a Primary Care E-Screening Tool for Mental Health Issues Among Te Tai Tokerau Youth: Protocol for a Co-Design Study

Background

In New Zealand (NZ), 1 in 4 adolescents is affected by mental health issues (eg, depression and anxiety) and engages in risk behaviors (eg, harmful drinking and substance abuse), with rates among Māori youth being significantly higher. The majority of NZ secondary school students visit their local primary health care providers (PHPs) at least annually, yet most do not seek help for mental health and risk behavior (MHB) concerns. While youth think it acceptable to discuss sensitive issues during a consultation with their PHPs, unless problems are severe, such conversations are not initiated by PHPs. Early intervention for MHB concerns can prevent long-term health and well-being issues. However, this relies on the early identification of developing problems and youth being offered and accepting help. YouthCHAT is an electronic, multi-item screening tool developed in 2016 to assess MHB concerns among youth. YouthCHAT is completed before a consultation with the PHP, who can access a summary report straight away. A help question allows young people to identify issues that need addressing. A resource pack uses stepped care pathways to guide providers to use appropriate brief interventions.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the utility, feasibility, and acceptability of YouthCHAT when tailored for use with youth in primary care settings with large Māori populations. Objectives of the study are to evaluate the implementation of YouthCHAT in nurse-led youth clinics, school-based clinics, and general practice in Te Tai Tokerau (Northland, NZ); to develop a framework for the scaling up of YouthCHAT across further settings; to assess health provider and youth acceptability of the tool; to improve screening rates for mental health and help-seeking behavior; to enable early identification of emerging problems; and to improve brief intervention delivery.

Methods

Using a bicultural mixed-methods co-design approach, 3 phases over a 3-year period will provide an iterative evaluation of the utility, feasibility, and acceptability of YouthCHAT, aiming to create a framework for wider-scale rollout and implementation.

Results

Recruitment for the first phase began in September 2018. YouthCHAT was implemented at the first site in October 2018 and is expected to be at a further two sites in late January to early February 2019. The study is due for completion at the end of 2021.

Conclusions

YouthCHAT has potential as a user-friendly, time efficient, and culturally safe screening tool for early detection of MHB issues in NZ youth. The resource pack assists the clinician to provide appropriate interventions for emerging and developed youth mental health and lifestyle issues. Involving input from community providers, users, and stakeholders will ensure that modifiable elements of YouthCHAT are tailored to meet the health needs specific to each context and will have a positive influence on future mental, physical, and social outcomes for NZ youth.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/12108

Individual-, family-, and school-level interventions targeting multiple risk behaviours in young people

BACKGROUND

Engagement in multiple risk behaviours can have adverse consequences for health during childhood, during adolescence, and later in life, yet little is known about the impact of different types of interventions that target multiple risk behaviours in children and young people, or the differential impact of universal versus targeted approaches. Findings from systematic reviews have been mixed, and effects of these interventions have not been quantitatively estimated.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of interventions implemented up to 18 years of age for the primary or secondary prevention of multiple risk behaviours among young people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 11 databases (Australian Education Index; British Education Index; Campbell Library; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; Embase; Education Resource Information Center (ERIC); International Bibliography of the Social Sciences; MEDLINE; PsycINFO; and Sociological Abstracts) on three occasions (2012, 2015, and 14 November 2016)). We conducted handsearches of reference lists, contacted experts in the field, conducted citation searches, and searched websites of relevant organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster RCTs, which aimed to address at least two risk behaviours. Participants were children and young people up to 18 years of age and/or parents, guardians, or carers, as long as the intervention aimed to address involvement in multiple risk behaviours among children and young people up to 18 years of age. However, studies could include outcome data on children > 18 years of age at the time of follow-up. Specifically,we included studies with outcomes collected from those eight to 25 years of age. Further, we included only studies with a combined intervention and follow-up period of six months or longer. We excluded interventions aimed at individuals with clinically diagnosed disorders along with clinical interventions. We categorised interventions according to whether they were conducted at the individual level; the family level; or the school level.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified a total of 34,680 titles, screened 27,691 articles and assessed 424 full-text articles for eligibility. Two or more review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.We pooled data in meta-analyses using a random-effects (DerSimonian and Laird) model in RevMan 5.3. For each outcome, we included subgroups related to study type (individual, family, or school level, and universal or targeted approach) and examined effectiveness at up to 12 months' follow-up and over the longer term (> 12 months). We assessed the quality and certainty of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in the review a total of 70 eligible studies, of which a substantial proportion were universal school-based studies (n = 28; 40%). Most studies were conducted in the USA (n = 55; 79%). On average, studies aimed to prevent four of the primary behaviours. Behaviours that were most frequently addressed included alcohol use (n = 55), drug use (n = 53), and/or antisocial behaviour (n = 53), followed by tobacco use (n = 42). No studies aimed to prevent self-harm or gambling alongside other behaviours.Evidence suggests that for multiple risk behaviours, universal school-based interventions were beneficial in relation to tobacco use (odds ratio (OR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 0.97; n = 9 studies; 15,354 participants) and alcohol use (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92; n = 8 studies; 8751 participants; both moderate-quality evidence) compared to a comparator, and that such interventions may be effective in preventing illicit drug use (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.00; n = 5 studies; 11,058 participants; low-quality evidence) and engagement in any antisocial behaviour (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; n = 13 studies; 20,756 participants; very low-quality evidence) at up to 12 months' follow-up, although there was evidence of moderate to substantial heterogeneity (I² = 49% to 69%). Moderate-quality evidence also showed that multiple risk behaviour universal school-based interventions improved the odds of physical activity (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.50; I² = 0%; n = 4 studies; 6441 participants). We considered observed effects to be of public health importance when applied at the population level. Evidence was less certain for the effects of such multiple risk behaviour interventions for cannabis use (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.01; P = 0.06; n = 5 studies; 4140 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), sexual risk behaviours (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.12; P = 0.22; n = 6 studies; 12,633 participants; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence), and unhealthy diet (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.06; P = 0.13; n = 3 studies; 6441 participants; I² = 49%; moderate-quality evidence). It is important to note that some evidence supported the positive effects of universal school-level interventions on three or more risk behaviours.For most outcomes of individual- and family-level targeted and universal interventions, moderate- or low-quality evidence suggests little or no effect, although caution is warranted in interpretation because few of these studies were available for comparison (n ≤ 4 studies for each outcome).Seven studies reported adverse effects, which involved evidence suggestive of increased involvement in a risk behaviour among participants receiving the intervention compared to participants given control interventions.We judged the quality of evidence to be moderate or low for most outcomes, primarily owing to concerns around selection, performance, and detection bias and heterogeneity between studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence is strongest for universal school-based interventions that target multiple- risk behaviours, demonstrating that they may be effective in preventing engagement in tobacco use, alcohol use, illicit drug use, and antisocial behaviour, and in improving physical activity among young people, but not in preventing other risk behaviours. Results of this review do not provide strong evidence of benefit for family- or individual-level interventions across the risk behaviours studied. However, poor reporting and concerns around the quality of evidence highlight the need for high-quality multiple- risk behaviour intervention studies to further strengthen the evidence base in this field.

Screening for risky behaviour and mental health in young people: the YouthCHAT programme

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of mental health concerns and risky health behaviours among young people is of global concern. A large proportion of young people in New Zealand (NZ) are affected by depression, suicidal ideation and other mental health concerns, but the majority do not access help. For NZ indigenous Māori, the burden of morbidity and mortality associated with mental health is considerably higher. Targeted screening for risky behaviours and mental health concerns among youth in primary care settings can lead to early detection and intervention for emerging or current mental health and psychosocial issues. Opportunistic screening for youth in primary care settings is not routinely undertaken due to competing time demands, lack of context-specific screening tools and insufficient knowledge about suitable interventions. Strategies are required to improve screening that are acceptable and appropriate for the primary care environment. This article outlines the development, utilisation and ongoing evaluation and implementation strategies for YouthCHAT.

YOUTHCHAT

YouthCHAT is a rapid, electronic, self-report screening tool that assesses risky health-related behaviours and mental health concerns, with a 'help question' that enables youth to prioritise areas they want help with. The young person can complete YouthCHAT in the waiting room prior to consultation, and after completion, the clinician can immediately access a summary report which includes algorithms for stepped-care interventions using a strength-based approach. A project to scale up the implementation is about to commence, using a co-design participatory research approach to assess acceptability and feasibility with successive roll-out to clinics. In addition, a counter-balanced randomised trial of YouthCHAT versus clinician-administered assessment is underway at a NZ high school.

CONCLUSION

Opportunistic screening for mental health concerns and other risky health behaviours during adolescence can yield significant health gains and prevent unnecessary morbidity and mortality. The systematic approaches to screening and provision of algorithms for stepped-care intervention will assist in delivering time efficient, early, more comprehensive interventions for youth with mental health concerns and other health compromising behaviours. The early detection of concerns and facilitation to evidence-based interventions has the potential to lead to improved health outcomes, particularly for under-served indigenous populations.

Improving Patient-Centered Care for Young People in General Practice With a Codesigned Screening App: Mixed Methods Study

Background

Despite experiencing a high prevalence and co-occurrence of mental health disorders and health-compromising behaviors, young people tend not to seek professional help for these concerns. However, they do regularly attend primary care, making primary care providers ideally situated to identify and discuss mental health and lifestyle issues as part of young people’s routine health care.

Objective

The aim was to investigate whether using a codesigned health and lifestyle-screening app, Check Up GP, in general practice influenced young people’s assessment of the quality of their care (measures of patient-centered care and youth friendliness), and their disclosure of sensitive issues. In addition, this study aimed to explore young people’s acceptance and experience of using a screening app during regular health care.

Methods

This was a mixed methods implementation study of Check Up GP with young people aged 14 to 25 years attending a general practice clinic in urban Melbourne, Australia. A 1-month treatment-as-usual group was compared to a 2-month intervention group in which young people and their general practitioners (GPs) used Check Up GP. Young people in both groups completed an exit survey immediately after their consultation about disclosure, patient-centered and youth-friendly care, and judgment. In addition, participants in the intervention group were surveyed about app acceptability and usability and their willingness to use it again. Semistructured interviews with participants in the intervention group expanded on themes covered in the survey.

Results

The exit survey was completed by 30 young people in the treatment-as-usual group and 85 young people in the intervention group. Young people using Check Up GP reported greater disclosure of health issues (P<.001), and rated their GP higher in patient-centered care: communication and partnership (P=.01), personal relationship (P=.01), health promotion (P=.03), and interest in effect on life (P<.001). No differences were found on core indicators of youth-friendly care: trust, level of comfort, expectations met, and time to ask questions. In all, 86% (73/85) of young people felt the app was a “good idea” and only 1% (1/85) thought it a “bad idea.” Thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with 14 participants found that Check Up GP created scope to address unmet health needs and increased sense of preparedness, with use moderated by honesty, motivation, app content and functionality, and app administration.

Conclusions

Integrating a health and lifestyle-screening app into face-to-face care can enrich young people’s experience of seeing their GP, create scope to identify and address unmet health needs, and increase patient-centered care. Further research is needed to investigate the effect of using a health and lifestyle-screening app in a diverse range of clinic types and settings, and with a diverse range of GPs and youth.

Health profiles of overweight and obese youth attending general practice

BACKGROUND

Literature suggests that overweight and obese young people use healthcare services more often, but this awaits confirmation in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To identify health profiles of underweight, overweight and obese young people attending general practice and compare them to normal-weight youth and also to explore the weight-related health risks of eating and exercise behaviour in the four different weight categories.

METHODS

This study used a cross-sectional design with baseline data from a trial including 683 young people (14-24 years of age) presenting to general practice. Through computer-assisted telephone interviews data were obtained on number and type of health complaints and consultations, emotional distress, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and eating and exercise behaviour.

RESULTS

General practitioners (GPs) were consulted more often by overweight (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.28, 95% CI (1.04 to 1.57)) and obese youth (IRR: 1.54, 95% CI (1.21 to 1.97), but not for different health problems compared with normal-weight youth. The reason for presentation was seldom a weight issue. Obese youth reported lower physical HRQoL. Obese and underweight youth were less likely to be satisfied with their eating behaviour than their normal-weight peers. Exercise levels were low in the entire cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the need for effective weight management given that overweight and obese youth consult their GP more often. Since young people do not present with weight issues, it becomes important for GPs to find ways to initiate the discussion about weight, healthy eating and exercise with youth.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN16059206.

General practitioners as educators in adolescent health: a training evaluation

BACKGROUND

General practitioners play an important role in the primary care of adolescents in both community and clinical settings. Yet studies show that GPs can lack confidence, skills and knowledge in adolescent health. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an innovative training intervention on medical participants' knowledge and confidence as adolescent health educators in a school setting.

METHODS

15 general practitioners, 12 general practice registrars and 18 medical students participated in an adolescent health education workshop followed by field experience in health education sessions in secondary schools. The mixed method design included a pre and post intervention survey and focus group interviews.

RESULTS

Mean scores on the Confidence to Teach scale increased significantly (3.34 ± 0.51 to 4.09 ± 0.33) (p < .001) as did confidence to communicate with adolescents (3.64 ± 0.48 to 4.19 ± 0.33) (p < .001). Mean knowledge scores increased significantly (7.00 ± 1.22 to 8.98 ± 1.11) (p < .001). Participants highlighted the value of learning about adolescent health issues and generic teaching skills especially lesson planning and design, practicing experiential teaching strategies and finding the 'sweet spot' when communicating with adolescents. Some participants reported that these skills would transfer to the practice setting.

CONCLUSION

An applied training intervention that uses evidence-based, experiential teaching strategies and focuses on developing knowledge and practical teaching skills appropriate for the health education of adolescents can enhance knowledge and confidence to engage in community-based adolescent health education.

'Nobody really gets it': a qualitative exploration of youth mental health in deprived urban areas

AIM

To examine the experience of developing and living with mental health and substance use disorders among young people living in urban-deprived areas in Ireland to inform primary care interventions.

METHOD

Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 young adults attending health and social care agencies in two deprived urban areas, and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: experiencing symptoms, symptom progression, delay accessing help, loss of control/crisis point, and consequences of mental health and substance use disorders. As young people delayed help, symptoms disrupted normal life progression and they found themselves unable to engage in everyday activities, and living with reduced potential. Living in deprived areas influenced the development of problems: many had added stressors, less familial support and early exposure to violence, addiction and bereavement.

CONCLUSION

Young people in urban-deprived areas are especially vulnerable to mental health and substance use disorders. Early identification in primary care appears necessary in halting symptom and illness progression, improving young people's chances of achieving their potential.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians’ detection of health risks and patients’ risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people’s health.

Design

Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not.

Setting

General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia

Participants

General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14–24 year old patients.

Intervention

This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients’ risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening.

Outcome Measures

Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients’ sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data.

Results

42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool.

Conclusions

A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Do Australian general practitioners believe practice nurses can take a role in chlamydia testing? A qualitative study of attitudes and opinions

BACKGROUND

Chlamydia notifications continue to rise in young people in many countries and regular chlamydia testing is an important prevention strategy. Although there have been initiatives to increase testing in primary care, none have specifically investigated the role of practice nurses (PNs) in maximising testing rates. PNs have previously expressed a willingness to be involved, but noted lack of support from general practitioners (GPs) as a barrier. We sought GPs' attitudes and opinions on PNs taking an expanded role in chlamydia testing and partner notification.

METHODS

In the context of a cluster randomised trial in mostly rural towns in 4 Australian states, semi structured interviews were conducted with 44 GPs between March 2011 and July 2012. Data relating to PN involvement in chlamydia testing were thematically analysed using a conventional content analysis approach.

RESULTS

The majority of GPs interviewed felt that a role for PNs in chlamydia testing was appropriate. GPs felt that PNs had more time for patient education and advice, that patients would find PNs easier to talk to and less intimidating than GPs, and that GPs themselves could benefit through a reduction in their workload. Although GPs felt that PNs could be utilised more effectively for preventative health activities such as chlamydia testing, many raised concerns about how these activities would be renumerated whilst some felt that existing workload pressures for PNs could make it difficult for them to expand their role. Whilst some rural GPs recognised that PNs might be well placed to conduct partner notification, they also recognised that issues of patient privacy and confidentiality related to living in a "small town" was also a concern.

CONCLUSION

This is the first qualitative study to explore GPs' views around an increased role for PNs in chlamydia testing. Despite the concerns raised by PNs, these findings suggest that GPs support the concept and recognise that PNs are suited to the role. However issues raised, such as funding and remuneration may act as barriers that will need to be addressed before PNs are supported to make a contribution to increasing chlamydia testing rates in general practice.

Psychosocial assessments for young people: a systematic review examining acceptability, disclosure and engagement, and predictive utility

Adolescence and young adulthood are often turbulent periods in a person’s life. There are high rates of accidental deaths, suicide, mental health concerns, substance use, and sexual experimentation. Health care professionals need to conduct holistic assessments of clients in these developmental life stages to identify psychosocial risks and provide targeted early intervention and implement prevention strategies. The most useful psychosocial assessments for most health care professionals are those that can provide a complete picture of the young person’s life and circumstances. This article identifies psychosocial assessment instruments that can be used as an initial assessment and engagement tool with the general population of young people presenting for health care. We review the psychometric properties of each of the instruments, determining what type of instrument is most acceptable to young people, whether any can increase disclosure and improve engagement between young people and health professionals, and whether they have predictive utility. The search strategy complied with the relevant sections of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A total of 89 published articles were identified, covering 31 different assessment instruments. Results indicated that those that were self-administered were most acceptable to young people, although it is unclear whether pen-and-paper or computer formats were preferred. Most psychosocial assessments can improve rates of disclosure and enhance engagement between young people and health professionals; however, worryingly, we found evidence that clinicians did not always respond to some of the most serious identified risks. Only for one instrument was there any mention of predictive utility. Future research should employ longitudinal approaches to determine the predictive utility of psychosocial assessments and focus on whether the use of new technologies can improve rates of disclosure.