Randomised controlled trial evaluating the effects of screening and referral for social determinants of health on Veterans' outcomes: protocol

Deborah Gurewich, Nancy Kressin, Barbara G Bokhour, Amy M Linsky, Melissa E Dichter, Kelly J Hunt, Gemmae M Fix, Barbara L Niles, Deborah Gurewich, Nancy Kressin, Barbara G Bokhour, Amy M Linsky, Melissa E Dichter, Kelly J Hunt, Gemmae M Fix, Barbara L Niles

Abstract

Introduction: Health policy leaders recommend screening and referral (S&R) for unmet social needs (eg, food) in clinical settings, and the American Heart Association recently concluded that the most significant opportunities for reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) death and disability lie with addressing the social determinants of CVD outcomes. A limited but promising evidence base supports these recommendations, but more rigorous research is needed to guide health care-based S&R efforts. Funded by the Veteran Health Administration (VA), the study described in this paper will assess the efficacy of S&R on Veterans' connections to new resources to address social needs, reduction of unmet needs and health-related outcomes (adherence, utilisation and clinical outcomes).

Methods and analysis: We will conduct a 1-year mixed-methods randomised controlled trial at three VA sites, enrolling Veterans with CVD and CVD-risk. 880 Veterans experiencing one or more social needs will be randomised within each site (n=293 per site) to one of three study arms representing referral mechanisms of varying intensity (screening only, screening and provision of resource sheet(s), screening and provision of resource sheet(s) plus social work assistance). For each Veteran, we will examine associations of unmet social needs with health-related outcomes at baseline, and longitudinally compare the impact of each approach on connection to new resources (primary outcome) and follow-up outcomes over a 12-month period. We will additionally conduct qualitative interviews with key stakeholders, including Veterans to identify potential explanatory factors related to the relative success of the interventions.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from the VA Central Internal Review Board on 13 July 2021 (reference #: 20-07-Amendment No. 02). Findings will be disseminated through reports, lay summaries, policy briefs, academic publications, and conference presentations.

Trial registration number: NCT04977583.

Keywords: adult cardiology; health policy; organisation of health services.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
On a weekly basis for the 12-month trial, we will identify potentially eligible Veterans with upcoming primary care appointments. Trained Research Assistants (RA) will contact Veterans to explain the research protocol, review the elements of informed consent, and secure verbal consent. During this phone call, if verbal informed consent is obtained, the RA will screen for unmet needs (hereafter, ‘index screen’). If a Veteran reports no unmet needs, their study participation will be restricted to objective 1. If a Veteran reports one or more unmet needs, the RA will randomise them to one of the three trial arms. Trial participants will be re-surveyed 8 weeks after the index screen to assess resource connection and 6 months after the index screen to assess unmet need reduction. CDW, Corporate Data Warehouse; RCT, randomised controlled trials.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Green links are supported by data; blue links need further investigation. AFor patients with multiple unmet social needs, resolution of one need may enable them to address another. Reduced competing demands include freeing up various resources (money, time and energy) to address other needs, which in turn can affect health outcomes. BClinical outcomes may include but are not limited to conditions where adherence to therapy directly impacts outcomes, such as hypertension, diabetes and asthma. CIdentification of unmet social needs may be beneficial, even without referring to resources. For patients with transportation problems, for example, delivering prescriptions through mail order can bypass the barrier posed by the unmet transportation need without directly addressing it. DImproved outcomes, such as improved well-being, may help patients connect to resources. ECosts may be reduced through improved control of chronic conditions, such as hypertension, which could avert costly future admissions for stroke or target organ damage. But increased costs to address unmet social needs may affect the equation for other conditions.

References

    1. Marmot M, Allen J, Bell R, et al. . WHO European review of social determinants of health and the health divide. Lancet 2012;380:1011–29. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61228-8
    1. McGinnis JM, Williams-Russo P, Knickman JR. The case for more active policy attention to health promotion. Health Aff 2002;21:78–93. 10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.78
    1. Hood CM, Gennuso KP, Swain GR, et al. . County health rankings: relationships between determinant factors and health outcomes. Am J Prev Med 2016;50:129–35. 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.024
    1. Havranek EP, Mujahid MS, Barr DA, et al. . Social determinants of risk and outcomes for cardiovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American heart association. Circulation 2015;132:873–98. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000228
    1. Berkowitz SA, Hulberg AC, Standish S, et al. . Addressing unmet basic resource needs as part of chronic cardiometabolic disease management. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:244–52. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7691
    1. Writing Group Members, Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, et al. . Executive Summary: Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics--2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2016;133:447–54. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000366
    1. Galobardes B, Smith GD, Lynch JW. Systematic review of the influence of childhood socioeconomic circumstances on risk for cardiovascular disease in adulthood. Ann Epidemiol 2006;16:91–104. 10.1016/j.annepidem.2005.06.053
    1. Kaplan GA, Keil JE. Socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular disease: a review of the literature. Circulation 1993;88:1973–98. 10.1161/01.cir.88.4.1973
    1. Pollitt RA, Rose KM, Kaufman JS. Evaluating the evidence for models of life course socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2005;5:7. 10.1186/1471-2458-5-7
    1. Dupre ME, George LK, Liu G, et al. . The cumulative effect of unemployment on risks for acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1731–7. 10.1001/2013.jamainternmed.447
    1. Kawachi I, Colditz GA, Ascherio A, et al. . A prospective study of social networks in relation to total mortality and cardiovascular disease in men in the USA. J Epidemiol Community Health 1996;50:245–51. 10.1136/jech.50.3.245
    1. Dzau VJ, McClellan MB, McGinnis JM. Vital directions for health and health care: priorities from a National Academy of Medicine initiativeNAM’s vital directions for health and health care initiativeNAM’s vital directions for health and health care initiative. JAMA 2017;317:1461–70.
    1. Daniel H, Bornstein SS, Kane GC, et al. . Addressing social determinants to improve patient care and promote health equity: an American College of physicians position paper. Ann Intern Med 2018;168:577–8. 10.7326/M17-2441
    1. Garg A, Toy S, Tripodis Y, et al. . Addressing social determinants of health at well child care visits: a cluster RCT. Pediatrics 2015;135:e296–304. 10.1542/peds.2014-2888
    1. Gordon JA, Emond JA, Camargo CA. The state children's health insurance program: a multicenter trial of outreach through the emergency department. Am J Public Health 2005;95:250–3. 10.2105/AJPH.2003.037242
    1. Gottlieb LM, Wing H, Adler NE. A systematic review of interventions on patients' social and economic needs. Am J Prev Med 2017;53:719–29. 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.05.011
    1. Zullig LL, Shaw RJ, Crowley MJ, et al. . Association between perceived life chaos and medication adherence in a postmyocardial infarction population. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013;6:619–25. 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.113.000435
    1. Gottlieb LM, Adler NE, Wing H, et al. . Effects of in-person assistance vs personalized written resources about social services on household social risks and child and caregiver health: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e200701. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0701
    1. Gottlieb LM, Hessler D, Long D, et al. . Effects of social needs screening and in-person service navigation on child health: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr 2016;170:e162521. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2521
    1. Poleshuck E, Wittink M, Crean HF, et al. . A comparative effectiveness trial of two patient-centered interventions for women with unmet social needs: personalized support for progress and enhanced screening and referral. J Womens Health 2020;29:242–52. 10.1089/jwh.2018.7640
    1. Seligman HK, Levi R, Ridberg R, et al. . Impact of enhanced food pantry services on food security among adults with diabetes using a crossover study design. Curr Dev Nutr 2022;6:nzac021. 10.1093/cdn/nzac021
    1. Billioux A, Verlander K, Anthony S. Standardized screening for health-related social needs in clinic settings: the accountable communities screening tool. Discussion paper, National Academy of Medicine, Washington, DC 2017.
    1. Fine MJ, Demakis JG. The Veterans health administration’s promotion of health equity for racial and ethnic minorities. Am J Public Health 2003;93:1622–4. 10.2105/ajph.93.10.1622
    1. Thurman WA, Harrison T. Social context and value-based care: a capabilities approach for addressing health disparities. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 2017;18:26–35. 10.1177/1527154417698145
    1. Cohen AJ, Rudolph JL, Thomas KS, et al. . Food insecurity among veterans: resources to screen and intervene. Fed Pract 2020;37:16–23.
    1. Gurewich D, Garg A, Kressin NR. Addressing social determinants of health within healthcare delivery systems: a framework to ground and inform health outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 2020;35:1571–5. 10.1007/s11606-020-05720-6
    1. Maslow AH. A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 1943;50:370–96. 10.1037/h0054346
    1. Andersen RM. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: does it matter? J Health Soc Behav 1995;36:1–10. 10.2307/2137284
    1. Institute of Medicine . Capturing social and behavioral domains and measures in electronic health records: phase 1. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US), 2014.
    1. National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) . PRAPARE. Available: [Accessed 3 Dec 2018].
    1. Torgerson DJ, Roberts C. Understanding controlled trials. Randomisation methods: concealment. BMJ 1999;319:375–6. 10.1136/bmj.319.7206.375
    1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: preparing people for change. Guilford Press, 1991.
    1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Ten things that motivational interviewing is not. Behav Cogn Psychother 2009;37:129–40. 10.1017/S1352465809005128
    1. Kressin NR, Long JA, Glickman ME, et al. . A brief, multifaceted, generic intervention to improve blood pressure control and reduce disparities had little effect. Ethn Dis 2016;26:27–36. 10.18865/ed.26.1.27
    1. Strauss AL. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, 2013.
    1. Bindman AB, Grumbach K, Osmond D, et al. . Preventable hospitalizations and access to health care. JAMA 1995;274:305–11.
    1. Borne RT, O'Donnell C, Turakhia MP, et al. . Adherence and outcomes to direct oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation: findings from the veterans health administration. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2017;17:236. 10.1186/s12872-017-0671-6
    1. Teo AR, Forsberg CW, Marsh HE, et al. . No-show rates when phone appointment reminders are not directly delivered. Psychiatr Serv 2017;68:1098–100. 10.1176/appi.ps.201700128
    1. Manze M, Rose AJ, Orner MB, et al. . Understanding racial disparities in treatment intensification for hypertension management. J Gen Intern Med 2010;25:819–25. 10.1007/s11606-010-1342-9

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다