Advertisement

Screening for Substance Use in Rural Primary Care: a Qualitative Study of Providers and Patients

  • Elizabeth C. SaundersEmail author
  • Sarah K. Moore
  • Trip Gardner
  • Sarah Farkas
  • Lisa A. Marsch
  • Bethany McLeman
  • Andrea Meier
  • Noah Nesin
  • John Rotrosen
  • Olivia Walsh
  • Jennifer McNeely
Original Research
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Substance use frequently goes undetected in primary care. Though barriers to implementing systematic screening for alcohol and drug use have been examined in urban settings, less is known about screening in rural primary care.

Objective

To identify current screening practices, barriers, facilitators, and recommendations for the implementation of substance use screening in rural federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).

Design

As part of a multi-phase study implementing electronic health record–integrated screening, focus groups (n = 60: all stakeholder groups) and individual interviews (n = 10 primary care providers (PCPs)) were conducted.

Participants

Three stakeholder groups (PCPs, medical assistants (MAs), and patients) at three rural FQHCs in Maine.

Approach

Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and content analyzed. Themes surrounding current substance use screening practices, barriers to screening, and recommendations for implementation were identified and organized by the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework.

Key Results

Identifying the problem: Stakeholders unanimously agreed that screening is important, and that universal screening is preferred to targeted approaches. Adapting to the local context: PCPs and MAs agreed that screening should be done annually. Views were mixed regarding the delivery of screening; patients preferred self-administered, tablet-based screening, while MAs and PCPs were divided between self-administered and face-to-face approaches. Assessing barriers: For patients, barriers to screening centered around a perceived lack of rapport with providers, which contributed to concerns about trust, judgment, and privacy. For PCPs and MAs, barriers included lack of comfort, training, and preparedness to address screening results and offer treatment.

Conclusions

Though stakeholders agree on the importance of implementing universal screening, concerns about the patient-provider relationship, the consequences of disclosure, and privacy appear heightened by the rural context. Findings highlight that strong relationships with providers are critical for patients, while in-clinic resources and training are needed to increase provider comfort and preparedness to address substance use.

KEY WORDS

substance use disorder screening primary care rural 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Kimberly Clark, Alison Carter, and Seamus Higgins, patients, providers, and staff at Penobscot Community Health Center, Brewer Medical System, and Helen Hunt Health Center who participated in the research.

Funding

This research was financially supported by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (UG1DA013035 [PIs John Rotrosen and Edward Nunes], UG1DA040309 [PI Lisa Marsch]), and T32-DA037202 (PI Alan Budney).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) of New York University School of Medicine and Dartmouth College.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11606_2019_5232_MOESM1_ESM.docx (61 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 61 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United States: Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA);2018. HHS Publication No. SMA 18–5068, NSDUH Series H-53.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmad FB, Rossen LM, Spencer MR, Warner M, Sutton P. Provisional drug overdose death counts. Atlanta: National Center for Health Statistics;2018.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). State Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment Services: TEDS 2005–2015. Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality;2017. BHSIS Series S-95, HHS Publication No. SMA 17–4360.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United States: Results from the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Rockville, MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA); 2017. HHS Publication No. SMA 17–5044.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bolin JN, Bellamy GR, Ferdinand AO, et al. Rural Healthy People 2020: New decade, same challenges. J Rural Health 2015;31(3):326–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rural Assistance Center. Substance Abuse. 2018; https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/topics/substance-abuse. Accessed 20 Dec 2018.
  7. 7.
    Palombi LC, St Hill CA, Lipsky MS, Swanoski MT, Lutfiyya MN. A scoping review of opioid misuse in the rural United States. Ann Epidemiol. 2018.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan YF, Lu SE, Howe B, Tieben H, Hoeft T, Unutzer J. Screening and follow-up monitoring for substance use in primary care: An exploration of rural-urban variations. J Gen Intern Med 2016;31(2):215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). HEDIS Measure: Unhealthy alcohol use screening and follow-up. Washington, DC; 2018.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, et al. Screening and behavioral counseling interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use in adolescents and adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. J Am Med Assoc 2018;320(18):1899–1909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Final Recommendation Statement: Drug Use, Illicit: Primary Care Interventions for Children and Adolescents. Rockville, MD; March 2015.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 524: Opioid abuse, dependence, and addiction in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119(5):1070–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). Substance use screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment. Pediatrics. 2016;138(1).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Facing addiction in America: The Surgeon General’s Report on Alcohol, Drugs and Health. Washington, DC; 2016.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lardiere MR, Jones E, Perez M. NACHC 2010 assessment of behavioral health services provided in federally qualified health centers. Bethesda: National Association of Community Health Centers; 2011.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hutchison L, Blakely C. Substance abuse trends in rural areas: A literature review. College Station: Southwest Rural Health Research Center School of Rural Public Health, The Texas A&M University System Health Science Center; 2010.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Venner KL, Sanchez V, Garcia J, Williams RL, Sussman AL. Moving away from the tip of the pyramid: Screening and brief intervention for risky alcohol and opioid use in underserved patients. J Am Board Fam Med 2018;31(2):243–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lakhan SE, Laird C. Addressing the primary care physician shortage in an evolving medical workforce. Int Arch Med 2009;2(1):14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hing E, Hsiao CJ. State variability in supply of office-based primary care providers: United States, 2012. NCHS data brief 2014(151):1–8.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) I. Removing barriers to care: Community health centers in rural areas. 2013.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Booth BM, Kirchner J, Fortney J, Ross R, Rost K. Rural at-risk drinkers: Correlates and one-year use of alcoholism treatment services. J Stud Alcohol 2000;61(2):267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Borders TF, Booth BM. Research on rural residence and access to drug abuse services: Where are we and where do we go? J Rural Health 2007;23 Suppl:79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lenardson J, Gale JA. Distribution of substance abuse treatment facilities across the rural-urban continuum. Portland: Maine Rural Health Research Center, Muskie School of Public Health, University of Southern Maine; 2008.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pullen E, Oser C. Barriers to substance abuse treatment in rural and urban communities: Counselor perspectives. Subst Use Misuse 2014;49(7):891–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Iyiewuare PO, McCullough C, Ober A, Becker K, Osilla K, Watkins KE. Demographic and mental health characteristics of individuals who present to community health clinics with substance misuse. Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology 2017;4:2333392817734523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? J Contin Educ Heal Prof 2006;26(1):13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lynch EA, Mudge A, Knowles S, Kitson AL, Hunter SC, Harvey G. “There is nothing so practical as a good theory”: A pragmatic guide for selecting theoretical approaches for implementation projects. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McNeely J, Kumar PC, Rieckmann T, et al. Barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of substance use screening in primary care clinics: A qualitative study of patients, providers, and staff. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2018;13(1):8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ringelstein Z. Medicaid is great, but rural Maine needs hospitals, too. The New York Times. 2017;Opinion.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wickenheiser M. Census: Maine most rural state in 2010 as urban centers grow nationwide. Bangor Daily News. 2012.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    McNeely J, Wu LT, Subramaniam G, et al. Performance of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medication, and Other Substance Use (TAPS) Tool for substance use screening in primary care patients. Ann Intern Med 2016;165(10):690–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Atlas.ti, Version 7 [computer program]. Berlin, GER; 2013.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lu CJ, Shulman SW. Rigor and flexibility in computer-based qualitative research: Introducing the Coding Analysis Toolkit (CAT). Int J Mult Res Approaches 2008;2:105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Elliott V. Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qual Rep 2018;23(11):2850–2861.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rahm AK, Boggs JM, Martin C, et al. Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing SBIRT in Primary Care in Integrated Health Care Settings. Substance abuse : official publication of the Association for Medical Education and Research in Substance Abuse. 2014:0.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Berger D, Bradley KA. Primary care management of alcohol misuse. Med Clin N Am 2015;99(5):989–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Townley C, Dorr H. Integrating substance use disorder treatment into primary care: A publication of the National Academy for State Health Policy. Washington, D.C.: National Academy for State Health Policy; 2017.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Drug poisoning mortality by state: United States. Rockville, MD; 2018.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kolodny A, Courtwright DT, Hwang CS, et al. The prescription opioid and heroin crisis: A public health approach to an epidemic of addiction. Annu Rev Public Health 2015;36:559–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Center for Study of Health and Risk Behaviors. Young adult health survey: Marijuana. University of Washington; 2015.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pacek LR, Mauro PM, Martins SS. Perceived risk of regular cannabis use in the United States from 2002 to 2012: Differences by sex, age, and race/ethnicity. Drug Alcohol Depend 2015;149:232–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nunes AP, Richmond MK, Marzano K, Swenson CJ, Lockhart J. Ten years of implementing screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT): Lessons learned. Subst Abus 2017;38(4):508–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ghitza UE, Tai B. Challenges and opportunities for integrating preventive substance-use-care services in primary care through the Affordable Care Act. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2014;25(1 Suppl):36–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wakeman SE, Pham-Kanter G, Donelan K. Attitudes, practices, and preparedness to care for patients with substance use disorder: Results from a survey of general internists. Subst Abus 2016;37(4):635–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    CASA Columbia. Missed opportunity: National survey of primary care physicians and patients on substance abuse. New York: Columbia University; 2000.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Yoast RA, Wilford BB, Hayashi SW. Encouraging physicians to screen for and intervene in substance use disorders: Obstacles and strategies for change. J Addict Dis 2008;27(3):77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Williams EC, Achtmeyer CE, Young JP, et al. Barriers to and facilitators of alcohol use disorder pharmacotherapy in primary care: A qualitative study in five VA clinics. J Gen Intern Med 2018;33(3):258–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    National Council for Behavioral Health. Implementing care for alcohol and other drug use in medical settings: An extension of SBIRT. February 2018.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kirchhoff AC, Hart G, Campbell EG. Rural and urban primary care physician professional beliefs and quality improvement behaviors. J Rural Health 2014;30(3):235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Brems C, Johnson ME, Warner TD, Roberts LW. Barriers to healthcare as reported by rural and urban interprofessional providers. Journal of Interprofessional Care 2006;20(2):105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    127th Maine Legislature. An act to prevent opiate abuse by strengthening the controlled substances prescription monitoring program, Maine Public Law 2015 Chapter 488. 2015.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Agley J, Adams ZW, Hulvershorn LA. Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) as a tool for continuing medical education on opioid use disorder and comorbidities. Addiction 2019;114(3):573–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Komaromy M, Duhigg D, Metcalf A, et al. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes): A new model for educating primary care providers about treatment of substance use disorders. Subst Abus 2016;37(1):20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Komaromy M, Bartlett J, Manis K, Arora S. Enhanced primary care treatment of behavioral disorders with ECHO case-based learning. Psychiatr Serv 2017;68(9):873–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Watkins KE, Ober AJ, Lamp K, et al. Collaborative care for opioid and alcohol use disorders in primary care: The SUMMIT randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177(10):1480–1488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Korthuis PT, McCarty D, Weimer M, et al. Primary care-based models for the treatment of opioid use disorder: A scoping review. Ann Intern Med 2017;166(4):268–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Liebschutz JM, Xuan Z, Shanahan CW, et al. Improving adherence to long-term opioid therapy guidelines to reduce opioid misuse in primary care: A cluster-randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177(9):1265–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    IQVIA Xponent. State and national totals of retail filled prescriptions: All opioid analgesics, 2013–2017. Danbury, CT; 2018.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Haskell M. Opioid prescribing declines steeply in Maine, data show. Bangor Daily News; 2018.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lawlor J. Number of opioids prescribed in Maine in 2017 fell 13 percent. Portland Press Herald; 2018.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ferguson C. Maine leads nation in decline of prescription opioid sales, report finds. Bangor Daily News; 2018.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wight, P. Intent on reversing its opioid epidemic, a state limits prescriptions. NHPR Morning Edition; 2017.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Palmer A, Karakus M, Mark T. Barriers faced by physicians in screening for substance use disorders among adolescents. Psychiatr Serv 2019;70(5):409–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Desjarlais-deKlerk K, Wallace JE. Instrumental and socioemotional communications in doctor-patient interactions in urban and rural clinics. BMC Health Serv Res 2013;13:261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Warner TD, Monaghan-Geernaert P, Battaglia J, Brems C, Johnson ME, Roberts LW. Ethical considerations in rural health care: A pilot study of clinicians in Alaska and New Mexico. Community Ment Health J 2005;41(1):21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Meltzer DO, Ruhnke GW. Redesigning care for patients at increased hospitalization risk: The Comprehensive Care Physician model. Health Aff 2014;33(5):770–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Fortney J, Mukherjee S, Curran G, Fortney S, Han X, Booth BM. Factors associated with perceived stigma for alcohol use and treatment among at-risk drinkers. J Behav Health Serv Res 2004;31(4):418–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hargrove DS. Ethical issues in rural mental health practice. Prof Psychol Res Pract 1986;17(1):20–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Nelson WA. Boundary issues in rural America. Overlapping relationships create ethical challenges for rural healthcare professionals. Healthc Exec 2010;25(2):56–57.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Graber MA. The overlapping roles of the rural doctor. AMA Journal of Ethics: Virtual Mentor 2011;13(5):273–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Unertl KM, Johnson KB, Lorenzi NM. Health information exchange technology on the front lines of healthcare: Workflow factors and patterns of use. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012;19(3):392–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Esmaeilzadeh P, Sambasivan M. Patients’ support for health information exchange: A literature review and classification of key factors. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2017;17(1):33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth C. Saunders
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sarah K. Moore
    • 2
  • Trip Gardner
    • 3
  • Sarah Farkas
    • 4
  • Lisa A. Marsch
    • 2
  • Bethany McLeman
    • 2
  • Andrea Meier
    • 2
  • Noah Nesin
    • 3
  • John Rotrosen
    • 4
  • Olivia Walsh
    • 2
  • Jennifer McNeely
    • 5
  1. 1.The Dartmouth Institute (TDI) for Health Policy and Clinical PracticeLebanonUSA
  2. 2.Center for Technology and Behavioral HealthGeisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA
  3. 3.Penobscot Community Health Care (PCHC)BangorUSA
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryNew York University School of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  5. 5.Department of Population HealthNew York University School of MedicineNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations