Cargando…

Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation

BACKGROUND: Research shows the profound impact of social factors on health, lead many healths systems to incorporate social risk screening. To help healthcare systems select among various screening tools we compared two tools, the Your Current Life Situation (YCLS) and the Accountable Health Communi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lewis, Cara C., Wellman, Robert, Jones, Salene M. W., Walsh-Bailey, Callie, Thompson, Ella, Derus, Alphonse, Paolino, Andrea, Steiner, John, De Marchis, Emilia H., Gottlieb, Laura M., Sharp, Adam L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209839
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_650_20
_version_ 1783607642469433344
author Lewis, Cara C.
Wellman, Robert
Jones, Salene M. W.
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Thompson, Ella
Derus, Alphonse
Paolino, Andrea
Steiner, John
De Marchis, Emilia H.
Gottlieb, Laura M.
Sharp, Adam L.
author_facet Lewis, Cara C.
Wellman, Robert
Jones, Salene M. W.
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Thompson, Ella
Derus, Alphonse
Paolino, Andrea
Steiner, John
De Marchis, Emilia H.
Gottlieb, Laura M.
Sharp, Adam L.
author_sort Lewis, Cara C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Research shows the profound impact of social factors on health, lead many healths systems to incorporate social risk screening. To help healthcare systems select among various screening tools we compared two tools, the Your Current Life Situation (YCLS) and the Accountable Health Communities (AHC) Screening tools, on key psychometric properties. METHOD: Kaiser Permanente Southern California subsidized exchange members (n = 1008) were randomly invited to complete a survey containing either the YCLS or the AHC tool, as well as other measures related to care experience and health. Healthcare use was measured through the electronic health record. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS was assessed using adjusted kappas for six domains (food – worry, food – pay, insecure housing, housing quality, transportation, utilities). To assess predictive validity, items on the AHC and YCLS were compared to self-rated health and receipt of a flu shot. RESULTS: Responders (n = 450) and non-responders (n = 558) significantly differed on sex, language, and depression (P < 0.05) but not anxiety, race/ethnicity, or healthcare use. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS tools was substantial on all items (kappas > 0.60) except for housing quality (kappa 0.52). Four out of six screening questions on the AHC tool and four out of seven on the YCLS tool were associated with self-rated health (P < 0.03). No social needs were associated with flu shot receipt except utilities on the AHC tool (P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: In this sample, the AHC and YCLS tools are similar in their ability to screen for social risks. Differences observed likely stem from the timeframe and wording of the questions, which can be used to guide selection in healthcare systems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7652127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76521272020-11-17 Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation Lewis, Cara C. Wellman, Robert Jones, Salene M. W. Walsh-Bailey, Callie Thompson, Ella Derus, Alphonse Paolino, Andrea Steiner, John De Marchis, Emilia H. Gottlieb, Laura M. Sharp, Adam L. J Family Med Prim Care Original Article BACKGROUND: Research shows the profound impact of social factors on health, lead many healths systems to incorporate social risk screening. To help healthcare systems select among various screening tools we compared two tools, the Your Current Life Situation (YCLS) and the Accountable Health Communities (AHC) Screening tools, on key psychometric properties. METHOD: Kaiser Permanente Southern California subsidized exchange members (n = 1008) were randomly invited to complete a survey containing either the YCLS or the AHC tool, as well as other measures related to care experience and health. Healthcare use was measured through the electronic health record. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS was assessed using adjusted kappas for six domains (food – worry, food – pay, insecure housing, housing quality, transportation, utilities). To assess predictive validity, items on the AHC and YCLS were compared to self-rated health and receipt of a flu shot. RESULTS: Responders (n = 450) and non-responders (n = 558) significantly differed on sex, language, and depression (P < 0.05) but not anxiety, race/ethnicity, or healthcare use. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS tools was substantial on all items (kappas > 0.60) except for housing quality (kappa 0.52). Four out of six screening questions on the AHC tool and four out of seven on the YCLS tool were associated with self-rated health (P < 0.03). No social needs were associated with flu shot receipt except utilities on the AHC tool (P = 0.028). CONCLUSION: In this sample, the AHC and YCLS tools are similar in their ability to screen for social risks. Differences observed likely stem from the timeframe and wording of the questions, which can be used to guide selection in healthcare systems. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7652127/ /pubmed/33209839 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_650_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Lewis, Cara C.
Wellman, Robert
Jones, Salene M. W.
Walsh-Bailey, Callie
Thompson, Ella
Derus, Alphonse
Paolino, Andrea
Steiner, John
De Marchis, Emilia H.
Gottlieb, Laura M.
Sharp, Adam L.
Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title_full Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title_fullStr Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title_short Comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
title_sort comparing the performance of two social risk screening tools in a vulnerable subpopulation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33209839
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_650_20
work_keys_str_mv AT lewiscarac comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT wellmanrobert comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT jonessalenemw comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT walshbaileycallie comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT thompsonella comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT derusalphonse comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT paolinoandrea comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT steinerjohn comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT demarchisemiliah comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT gottlieblauram comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation
AT sharpadaml comparingtheperformanceoftwosocialriskscreeningtoolsinavulnerablesubpopulation