Use of newly covered versus established preventive care screening: Comparison of depression and smoking screening

Elizabeth R. Pfoh, Zackary Berger, Ramin Mojtabai, Jenny Bailey, Sydney E Dy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Pay-for-value initiatives include both depression and smoking screening. Evaluating how patterns of care differ for an established screening (smoking) versus newer screening (depression) can help programs better implement these measures. Our objective is to evaluate (1) patterns of smoking and depression screening and (2) how patient factors affect screening patterns. We analyzed retrospectively collected electronic health record data from 4,763 Medicare-patients in 34 primary care practices between 2010 and 2012. The relationship between multimorbidity, history of stroke, and having depression on receipt of screening was evaluated. The outcome variables were no screening, smoking screening only, or concurrent smoking and depression screening. Fifty percent of patients were screened for smoking at every visit and never screened for depression (n = 2,378). Twelve percent of patients with $five visits received both depression and smoking-status screens on each of their first five visits. Screening patterns varied significantly across sites. For example, one site screened approximately 87% of patients for both depression and smoking-status at every visit. Another site screened 93% of patients for smoking during the first visit but did not conduct depression screening. Programs considering initiating new screenings should evaluate the clinic-specific workflow of successful screenings and integrate new screenings using the same strategy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e91-e101
JournalJournal for Healthcare Quality
Volume39
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Preventive Medicine
Smoking
Depression
Workflow
Electronic Health Records
Medicare
Comorbidity
Primary Health Care
Stroke

Keywords

  • Depression
  • Medicare
  • Preventive care
  • Primary care
  • Screening
  • Smoking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Use of newly covered versus established preventive care screening : Comparison of depression and smoking screening. / Pfoh, Elizabeth R.; Berger, Zackary; Mojtabai, Ramin; Bailey, Jenny; Dy, Sydney E.

In: Journal for Healthcare Quality, Vol. 39, No. 6, 01.01.2017, p. e91-e101.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d6de46d0208747818c9afa2888a7be7d,
title = "Use of newly covered versus established preventive care screening: Comparison of depression and smoking screening",
abstract = "Pay-for-value initiatives include both depression and smoking screening. Evaluating how patterns of care differ for an established screening (smoking) versus newer screening (depression) can help programs better implement these measures. Our objective is to evaluate (1) patterns of smoking and depression screening and (2) how patient factors affect screening patterns. We analyzed retrospectively collected electronic health record data from 4,763 Medicare-patients in 34 primary care practices between 2010 and 2012. The relationship between multimorbidity, history of stroke, and having depression on receipt of screening was evaluated. The outcome variables were no screening, smoking screening only, or concurrent smoking and depression screening. Fifty percent of patients were screened for smoking at every visit and never screened for depression (n = 2,378). Twelve percent of patients with $five visits received both depression and smoking-status screens on each of their first five visits. Screening patterns varied significantly across sites. For example, one site screened approximately 87{\%} of patients for both depression and smoking-status at every visit. Another site screened 93{\%} of patients for smoking during the first visit but did not conduct depression screening. Programs considering initiating new screenings should evaluate the clinic-specific workflow of successful screenings and integrate new screenings using the same strategy.",
keywords = "Depression, Medicare, Preventive care, Primary care, Screening, Smoking",
author = "Pfoh, {Elizabeth R.} and Zackary Berger and Ramin Mojtabai and Jenny Bailey and Dy, {Sydney E}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000037",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "e91--e101",
journal = "Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality",
issn = "1062-2551",
publisher = "National Association for Healthcare Quality",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of newly covered versus established preventive care screening

T2 - Comparison of depression and smoking screening

AU - Pfoh, Elizabeth R.

AU - Berger, Zackary

AU - Mojtabai, Ramin

AU - Bailey, Jenny

AU - Dy, Sydney E

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Pay-for-value initiatives include both depression and smoking screening. Evaluating how patterns of care differ for an established screening (smoking) versus newer screening (depression) can help programs better implement these measures. Our objective is to evaluate (1) patterns of smoking and depression screening and (2) how patient factors affect screening patterns. We analyzed retrospectively collected electronic health record data from 4,763 Medicare-patients in 34 primary care practices between 2010 and 2012. The relationship between multimorbidity, history of stroke, and having depression on receipt of screening was evaluated. The outcome variables were no screening, smoking screening only, or concurrent smoking and depression screening. Fifty percent of patients were screened for smoking at every visit and never screened for depression (n = 2,378). Twelve percent of patients with $five visits received both depression and smoking-status screens on each of their first five visits. Screening patterns varied significantly across sites. For example, one site screened approximately 87% of patients for both depression and smoking-status at every visit. Another site screened 93% of patients for smoking during the first visit but did not conduct depression screening. Programs considering initiating new screenings should evaluate the clinic-specific workflow of successful screenings and integrate new screenings using the same strategy.

AB - Pay-for-value initiatives include both depression and smoking screening. Evaluating how patterns of care differ for an established screening (smoking) versus newer screening (depression) can help programs better implement these measures. Our objective is to evaluate (1) patterns of smoking and depression screening and (2) how patient factors affect screening patterns. We analyzed retrospectively collected electronic health record data from 4,763 Medicare-patients in 34 primary care practices between 2010 and 2012. The relationship between multimorbidity, history of stroke, and having depression on receipt of screening was evaluated. The outcome variables were no screening, smoking screening only, or concurrent smoking and depression screening. Fifty percent of patients were screened for smoking at every visit and never screened for depression (n = 2,378). Twelve percent of patients with $five visits received both depression and smoking-status screens on each of their first five visits. Screening patterns varied significantly across sites. For example, one site screened approximately 87% of patients for both depression and smoking-status at every visit. Another site screened 93% of patients for smoking during the first visit but did not conduct depression screening. Programs considering initiating new screenings should evaluate the clinic-specific workflow of successful screenings and integrate new screenings using the same strategy.

KW - Depression

KW - Medicare

KW - Preventive care

KW - Primary care

KW - Screening

KW - Smoking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044158357&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044158357&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000037

DO - 10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000037

M3 - Article

C2 - 27442712

AN - SCOPUS:85044158357

VL - 39

SP - e91-e101

JO - Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality

JF - Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality

SN - 1062-2551

IS - 6

ER -