Substance use treatment clinician attitudes to care for chronic disease health risk behaviours and associations of attitudes with care provision.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: People who use substances have a high prevalence of modifiable chronic disease health risk behaviours. Preventive care to address such risks has not traditionally been provided during substance use treatment. This study aimed to assess clinicians' attitudes towards preventive care and their association with care provision. DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study utilising computer-assisted telephone interviews was undertaken with clinicians (n = 54) of community-based substance use treatment services in one health district, Australia. Clinicians indicated their agreement with 10 attitudinal statements regarding their perceived role and self-efficacy in providing preventive care and perceptions of client interest in modifying behaviours. Logistic regression analyses examined the association between clinician attitudinal items and self-reported care provision. RESULTS: Fifty-four clinicians (74%) agreed to participate. The most positive attitudes were preventive care being part of their role (100%), and they have the knowledge and skills to provide preventive care (100%). The least favourable attitude was clients were interested in changing their health risk behaviours (60%). Clinicians who reported that preventive care left little time to undertake acute care were more likely to assess for smoking (OR 8.06 [95% CI 1.31, 49.46]) and less likely to provide brief advice for all risks combined (OR 0.11 [95% CI 0.02, 0.63]). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Overall, clinicians reported positive attitudes regarding the preventive care provision for modifiable health risk behaviours in substance use treatment settings. Further research is required to investigate why, despite such positive attitudes, clinicians in substance use treatment settings do not routinely provide preventive care.

Systematic Review of Universal Resilience-Focused Interventions Targeting Child and Adolescent Mental Health in the School Setting.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of universal, school-based, resilience-focused interventions on mental health problems in children and adolescents. METHOD: Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of universal, school-based interventions that included strategies to strengthen a minimum of 3 internal resilience protective factors, and included an outcome measure of mental health problems in children and adolescents aged 5 to 18 years. Six databases were searched from 1995 to 2015. Results were pooled in meta-analyses by mental health outcome (anxiety symptoms, depressive symptoms, hyperactivity, conduct problems, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and general psychological distress), for all trials (5-18 years). Subgroup analyses were conducted by age (child: 5-10 years; adolescent: 11-18 years), length of follow-up (short: post-≤12 months; long: >12 months), and gender (narrative). RESULTS: A total of 57 included trials were identified from 5,984 records, with 49 contributing to meta-analyses. For all trials, resilience-focused interventions were effective relative to a control in reducing 4 of 7 outcomes: depressive symptoms, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, and general psychological distress. For child trials (meta-analyses for 6 outcomes), interventions were effective for anxiety symptoms and general psychological distress. For adolescent trials (meta-analyses for 5 outcomes), interventions were effective for internalizing problems. For short-term follow-up, interventions were effective for 2 of 7 outcomes: depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms. For long-term follow-up (meta-analyses for 5 outcomes), interventions were effective for internalizing problems. CONCLUSION: The findings may suggest most promise for using universal resilience-focused interventions at least for short-term reductions in depressive and anxiety symptoms for children and adolescents, particularly if a cognitive-behavioral therapy-based approach is used. The limited number of trials providing data amenable for meta-analysis for some outcomes and subgroups, the variability of interventions, study quality, and bias mean that it is not possible to draw more specific conclusions. Identifying what intervention qualities (such as number and type of protective factor) achieve the greatest positive effect per mental health problem outcome remains an important area for future research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL AND REGISTRATION: Systematic Review of Universal Resilience Interventions Targeting Child and Adolescent Mental Health in the School Setting; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-015-0172-6; PROSPERO CRD42015025908.

Increasing the provision of preventive care by community healthcare services: a stepped wedge implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Although clinical guidelines recommend the provision of care to reduce client chronic disease risk behaviours, such care is provided sub-optimally by primary healthcare providers. A study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of an intervention in increasing community-based clinician implementation of multiple elements of recommended preventive care for four risk behaviours. METHODS: A three-group stepped-wedge trial was undertaken with all 56 community-based primary healthcare facilities in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. A 12-month implementation intervention was delivered sequentially in each of three geographically and administratively defined groups of facilities. The intervention consisted of six key strategies: leadership and consensus processes, enabling systems, educational meetings and training, audit and feedback, practice change support, and practice change information and resources. Client-reported receipt of three elements of preventive care: assessment; brief advice; referral for four behavioural risks: smoking, inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption, alcohol overconsumption, and physical inactivity, individually, and for all such risks combined were collected for 56 months (October 2009-May 2014). Segmented logistic regression models were developed to assess intervention effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 5369 clients participated in data collection. Significant increases were found for receipt of four of five assessment outcomes (smoking OR 1.53; fruit and/or vegetable intake OR 2.18; alcohol consumption OR 1.69; all risks combined OR 1.78) and two of five brief advice outcomes (fruit and/or vegetable intake OR 2.05 and alcohol consumption OR 2.64). No significant increases in care delivery were observed for referral for any risk behaviour, or for physical inactivity. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation intervention was effective in enhancing assessment of client risk status but less so for elements of care that could reduce client risk: provision of brief advice and referral. The intervention was ineffective in increasing care addressing physical inactivity. Further research is required to identify barriers to the provision of preventive care and the effectiveness of practice change interventions in increasing its provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611001284954 . Registered 15 December 2011. Retrospectively registered.

Modifiable health risk behaviours and attitudes towards behaviour change of clients attending community-based substance use treatment services.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Health risk behaviours, such as smoking, nutrition and physical inactivity, are significant contributors to chronic disease for people with substance use disorders. This study reports the prevalence of these behaviours amongst substance use treatment clients, their attitudes towards modifying such behaviours and the acceptability of receiving support to do so. Client characteristics associated with risk status and interest in modifying behaviours were examined. DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was undertaken with clients of 15 community substance use treatment services within in New South Wales, Australia. Data for the study were collected via computer assisted telephone interviews. RESULTS: Of those contactable and eligible, 386 (71%) clients completed the survey. Clients reported a high prevalence of smoking (80%), insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption (89%) and insufficient physical activity (31%). Overall, 51-69% of clients reported considering modifying their health risk behaviours and 88-97% thought it was acceptable to be provided preventive care to address such behaviours. Younger clients were more likely to smoke (18-34 years (odds ratio [OR] = 4.6 [95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9, 11.3]); 35-54 years (OR = 2.6 [95% CI = 1.2, 5.7])) and be interested in increasing vegetable consumption (18-34 years (OR = 4.4 [95% CI = 1.3, 14.8]); 35-54 years (OR = 8.0 [95% CI = 2.5, 25.4])) than older clients (≥55 years). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of health risk behaviours amongst clients of community substance use treatment services. However, contrary to commonly cited barriers to care provision, clients are interested in modifying their risk behaviours and report that receiving preventive care to address these behaviours is acceptable. [Tremain D, Freund M, Wolfenden L, Wye P, Bowman J, Dunlop A, Gillham K, Bartlem K, McElwaine K, Gow B, Wiggers J. Modifiable health risk behaviours and attitudes towards behaviour change of clients attending community-based substance use treatment services. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:369-377.].

Provision of Chronic Disease Preventive Care in Community Substance Use Services: Client and Clinician Report.

INTRODUCTION: People with substance use problems have a higher prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviors. Routine clinician provision of preventive care may be effective in reducing such health behaviors. This study aimed to examine clinician provision of preventive care to clients of community substance use treatment services. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was undertaken with 386 clients and 54 clinicians of community substance use treatment services in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. Client- and clinician-reported provision of three elements of care (assessment, brief advice and referral) for three health risk behaviors (tobacco smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity) was assessed, with associations with client characteristics examined. RESULTS: Provision was highest for tobacco smoking assessment (90% client reported, 87% clinician reported) and brief advice (79% client reported, 80% clinician reported) and lowest for fruit and vegetable consumption (assessment 23%, brief advice 25%). Few clients reported being offered a referral (<10%). Assessment of physical activity and brief advice for all behaviors was higher for clients residing in rural/remote areas. CONCLUSION: Assessment and brief advice were provided to the majority of clients for smoking, but sub-optimally for the other behaviors. Further investigation of barriers to the provision of preventive care within substance use treatment settings is required, particularly for referral to ongoing support.

Effectiveness of an intervention in increasing the provision of preventive care by community mental health services: a non-randomized, multiple baseline implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Relative to the general population, people with a mental illness are more likely to have modifiable chronic disease health risk behaviours. Care to reduce such risks is not routinely provided by community mental health clinicians. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of an intervention in increasing the provision of preventive care by such clinicians addressing four chronic disease risk behaviours. METHODS: A multiple baseline trial was undertaken in two groups of community mental health services in New South Wales, Australia (2011-2014). A 12-month practice change intervention was sequentially implemented in each group. Outcome data were collected continuously via telephone interviews with a random sample of clients over a 3-year period, from 6 months pre-intervention in the first group, to 6 months post intervention in the second group. Outcomes were client-reported receipt of assessment, advice and referral for tobacco smoking, harmful alcohol consumption, inadequate fruit and/or vegetable consumption and inadequate physical activity and for the four behaviours combined. Logistic regression analyses examined change in client-reported receipt of care. RESULTS: There was an increase in assessment for all risks combined following the intervention (18 to 29 %; OR 3.55, p = 0.002: n = 805 at baseline, 982 at follow-up). No significant change in assessment, advice or referral for each individual risk was found. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention had a limited effect on increasing the provision of preventive care. Further research is required to determine how to increase the provision of preventive care in community mental health services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000693729.

Systematic review of interventions to increase the delivery of preventive care by primary care nurses and allied health clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Primary care nurses and allied health clinicians are potential providers of opportunistic preventive care. This systematic review aimed to summarise evidence for the effectiveness of practice change interventions in increasing nurse or allied health professional provision of any of five preventive care elements (ask, assess, advise, assist, and/or arrange) for any of four behavioural risks (smoking, inadequate nutrition, alcohol overconsumption, physical inactivity) within a primary care setting. METHODS: A search of Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases was undertaken to locate controlled intervention trials published between 1992 and May 2014 that provided practice change interventions to primary care nurses and/or allied health professionals to increase preventive care. The effect of interventions aimed at increasing the provision of any of the five care elements for any of the four behavioural risks was examined. A narrative synthesis was utilised. RESULTS: From 8109 articles, seven trials met the inclusion criteria. All trials bar one, assessed multi-strategic practice change interventions (three to five strategies) focused on care by nurses (six trials) or mixed nursing/allied health clinicians. One trial examined care provision for all four risks, five trials examined care for smoking only, and one trial examined care for alcohol consumption only. For the six trials reporting significance testing (excludes one smoking care trial), significant effects favouring the intervention group were reported in at least one trial for smoking risk assessment (2/4 trials reported an effect for at least one analysis of an assessment outcome), brief advice (2/3), assistance (2/2), and arranging referral (2/3); alcohol risk assessment (1/2) and brief advice (1/2); inadequate nutrition risk assessment (1/1); and physical inactivity risk assessment and brief advice (1/1). When the number of analyses undertaken within trials focusing on smoking care was considered, the results were less promising (e.g. of the 15 analyses conducted on brief advice variables across three trials, four showed a positive effect). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for the effect of practice change interventions on preventive care by primary care nurses or allied health providers is inconclusive given the small number of trials and inconsistency of results between and within trials. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: None.

Mental health clinician attitudes to the provision of preventive care for chronic disease risk behaviours and association with care provision.

BACKGROUND: Preventive care for chronic disease risk behaviours by mental health clinicians is sub-optimal. Little research has examined the association between clinician attitudes and such care delivery. This study aimed to explore: i) the attitudes of a multi-disciplinary group of community mental health clinicians regarding their perceived role, perception of client interest, and perceived self-efficacy in the provision of preventive care, ii) whether such attitudes differ by professional discipline, and iii) the association between these attitudes and clinician provision of such care. METHOD: A telephone survey was conducted with 151 Australian community mental health clinicians regarding their attitudes towards provision of assessment, advice and referral addressing smoking, nutrition, alcohol, and physical activity, and their reported provision of such care. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between attitudes and care delivery, and attitudinal differences by professional discipline. RESULTS: Most clinicians reported that: their manager supported provision of preventive care; such care was part of their role; it would not jeopardise their practitioner-client relationships, clients found preventive care acceptable, and that they had the confidence, knowledge and skills to modify client health behaviours. Half reported that clients were not interested in changing their health behaviours, and one third indicated that the provision of preventive care negatively impacted on time available for delivery of acute care. The following attitudes were positively associated with the provision of preventive care: role congruence, client interest in change, and addressing health risk behaviours will not jeopardise the client-clinician relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies are required to translate positive attitudes to improved client care and address attitudes which may hinder the provision of preventive care in community mental health.

Acceptability and Receipt of Preventive Care for Chronic-Disease Health Risk Behaviors Reported by Clients of Community Mental Health Services.

OBJECTIVE: Compared with the general population, people with a mental illness have a greater prevalence of behaviors that contribute to higher chronic disease rates. Mental health clinical guidelines recommend preventive care to address such behaviors; however, little information is available about whether clients consider preventive care acceptable or about the prevalence of such care in mental health services. This article describes acceptability and receipt of assessment, advice, and referral for smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, harmful alcohol consumption, and physical inactivity, as reported by community mental health service clients. The association between preventive care, diagnosis, and number of clinical appointments was examined. METHODS: A cross-sectional telephone interview was conducted with clients (N=558) of community mental health services in Australia. RESULTS: Although preventive care was highly acceptable to clients (86%-97%), receipt of preventive care was low. Client receipt of risk assessment ranged from 26% (assessment of fruit or vegetable intake) to 76% (assessment of alcohol consumption). The proportion of clients at risk of and assessed for unhealthy behavior who then received brief advice ranged from 69% (fruit or vegetable intake) to 85% (physical activity), whereas only 38% (alcohol consumption) to 49% (smoking) received any referral. A greater number of mental health appointments were associated with higher prevalence of preventive care, as were diagnoses of diabetes or respiratory conditions and not having a schizophrenia diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Practice change strategies are required to increase the delivery of routine preventive care within mental health services if clients are to benefit from clinical guidelines.

Implementation of a smoke-free policy in an inpatient psychiatric facility: Patient-reported adherence, support, and receipt of nicotine-dependence treatment.

The implementation of smoke-free policies in inpatient psychiatric facilities, including patient adherence, mental health nursing staff support, and provision of nicotine-dependence treatment to patients, has been reported to be poor. The extent to which the quality of smoke-free policy implementation is associated with patient views of a policy is unknown. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 181 patients (53.6%, n = 97 smokers; and 46.4%, n = 84 non-smokers) in an Australian inpatient psychiatric facility with a total smoke-free policy. Smokers' adherence to the policy was poor (83.5% smoked). Only half (53.6%) perceived staff to be supportive of the policy. Most smokers used nicotine-replacement therapy (75.3%); although few received optimal nicotine-dependence treatment (19.6%). Overall, 45.9% of patients viewed the smoke-free policy in the unit as positive (29.9% smokers; 64.3% non-smokers). For smokers, adhering to the ban, perceiving staff to be supportive, and reporting that the nicotine-replacement therapy reduced cravings to smoke were associated with a more positive view towards the smoke-free policy. These findings support the importance of patient adherence, mental health nursing staff support, and adequate provision of nicotine-dependence treatment in strengthening smoke-free policy implementation in inpatient psychiatric settings.

Chronic disease health risk behaviours amongst people with a mental illness.

OBJECTIVE: Amongst people with a mental illness, modifiable health risk behaviours contribute substantially to increased chronic disease morbidity and mortality. This study examined the prevalence of and interest in changing such behaviours amongst community mental health service clients in Australia. METHOD: A telephone interview was undertaken with Australian community mental health service clients. Participants reported engagement in four health risk behaviours: tobacco smoking, fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol consumption, and physical activity. Participants were classified as at risk based upon Australian national guidelines. At-risk participants were asked whether they were considering improving their health risk behaviour within the next month. The association between psychiatric diagnosis and risk, and interest in improving health risk behaviours was examined. RESULTS: Risk prevalence was highest for inadequate vegetable consumption (78.3%), followed by inadequate fruit consumption (60%), smoking (50.7%), physical inactivity (46.8%), short-term alcohol risk (40.3%) and chronic alcohol risk (35.3%). A majority of at-risk participants were considering improving their health risk behaviour for smoking, physical inactivity and inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption (65.1%, 71.1%, and 53.3%, respectively). After adjusting for demographic factors, no diagnostic categories were associated with risk for any behaviour. Those with a diagnosis of depression were more likely to be interested in quitting smoking and increasing physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of diagnosis, a high prevalence of chronic disease health risk behaviours was identified, with many participants expressing an interest in improving these behaviours. Such findings reinforce recommendations that preventive care addressing the chronic disease risks of clients be provided routinely by mental health clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000693729. URL: www.anzctr.org.au/.

Care provision to prevent chronic disease by community mental health clinicians.

BACKGROUND: People with a mental illness have higher prevalence of behavioral risks for chronic disease than the general population. Despite recommendations regarding the provision of preventive care by mental health services, limited research has examined the extent to which such care is provided. PURPOSE: To examine mental health clinician provision of care for preventable chronic disease risks, and whether such care was associated with the availability of practice support strategies. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was undertaken of 151 community mental health clinicians in New South Wales, Australia regarding the provision of three elements of preventive care (i.e., assessment, brief advice, and referral/follow-up) for four health risk behaviors (i.e., tobacco smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, harmful alcohol consumption, and inadequate physical activity). Clinicians reported the availability of 16 strategies to support such care delivery. Data were collected in 2010 and analyzed in 2012-2013. RESULTS: Preventive care provision varied by both care element and risk behavior. Optimal care (each care element provided to at least 80% of clients for all health behaviors) was provided by few clinicians: assessment (8.6%), brief advice (24.5%), and referral/follow-up (9.9%). Less than half of clinicians reported more than four support strategies were available (44.4%). The availability of five or more strategies was associated with increased optimal preventive care. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of preventive care focused on chronic disease prevention in community mental health services is suboptimal. Interventions to increase the routine provision of such care should involve increasing the availability of evidence-based strategies to support care provision.

Increasing preventive care by primary care nursing and allied health clinicians: a non-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although primary care nurse and allied health clinician consultations represent key opportunities for the provision of preventive care, it is provided suboptimally. PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of a practice change intervention in increasing primary care nursing and allied health clinician provision of preventive care for four health risks. DESIGN: Two-group (intervention versus control), non-randomized controlled study assessing the effectiveness of the intervention in increasing clinician provision of preventive care. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Randomly selected clients from 17 primary healthcare facilities participated in telephone surveys that assessed their receipt of preventive care prior to (September 2009-2010, n=876) and following intervention (October 2011-2012, n=1,113). INTERVENTION: The intervention involved local leadership and consensus processes, electronic medical record system modification, educational meetings and outreach, provision of practice change resources and support, and performance monitoring and feedback. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was differential change in client-reported receipt of three elements of preventive care (assessment, brief advice, referral/follow-up) for each of four behavioral risks individually (smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol overconsumption, physical inactivity) and combined. Logistic regression assessed intervention effectiveness. RESULTS: Analyses conducted in 2013 indicated significant improvements in preventive care delivery in the intervention compared to the control group from baseline to follow-up for assessment of fruit and vegetable consumption (+23.8% vs -1.5%); physical activity (+11.1% vs -0.3%); all four risks combined (+16.9% vs -1.0%) and for brief advice for inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption (+19.3% vs -2.0%); alcohol overconsumption (+14.5% vs -8.9%); and all four risks combined (+14.3% vs +2.2%). The intervention was ineffective in increasing the provision of the remaining forms of preventive care. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention's impact on the provision of preventive care varied by both care element and risk type. Further intervention is required to increase the consistent provision of preventive care, particularly referral/follow-up.

Clinician assessment, advice and referral for multiple health risk behaviors: prevalence and predictors of delivery by primary health care nurses and allied health professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Primary care clinicians have considerable potential to provide preventive care. This study describes their preventive care delivery. METHODS: A survey of 384 community health nurses and allied health clinicians from in New South Wales, Australia was undertaken (2010-11) to examine the assessment of client risk, provision of brief advice and referral/follow-up regarding smoking inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity; the existence of preventive care support strategies; and the association between supports and preventive care provision. RESULTS: Preventive care to 80% or more clients was least often provided for referral/follow-up (24.7-45.6% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.2% for all risks) and most often for assessment (34.4-69.3% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.4% for all risks). Approximately 75% reported having 9 or fewer of 17 supports. Provision of care was associated with: availability of a paper screening tool; training; GP referral letter; and number of supports. CONCLUSION: The delivery of preventive care was limited, and varied according to type of care and risk. Supports were variably associated with elements of preventive care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Further research is required to increase routine preventive care delivery and the availability of supports.

Evaluating the effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing clinician provision of preventive care in a network of community-based mental health services: a study protocol of a non-randomized, multiple baseline trial.

BACKGROUND: People with a mental illness experience substantial disparities in health, including increased rates of morbidity and mortality caused by potentially preventable chronic diseases. One contributing factor to such disparity is a higher prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviors, such as smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable intake, harmful alcohol consumption, and inadequate physical activity. Evidence supports the effectiveness of preventive care in reducing such risks, and guidelines recommend that preventive care addressing such risks be incorporated into routine clinical care. Although community-based mental health services represent an important potential setting for ensuring that people with a mental illness receive such care, research suggests its delivery is currently sub-optimal. A study will be undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing the routine provision of preventive care by clinicians in community mental health settings. METHODS/DESIGN: A two-group multiple baseline design will be utilized to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic intervention implemented over 12 months in increasing clinician provision of preventive care. The intervention will be implemented sequentially across the two groups of community mental health services to increase provision of client assessment, brief advice, and referral for four health risk behaviors (smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, harmful alcohol consumption, and inadequate physical activity). Outcome measures of interest will be collected via repeated cross-sectional computer-assisted telephone interviews undertaken on a weekly basis for 36 months with community mental health clients. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic clinical practice change intervention in increasing routine clinician provision of preventive care for chronic disease behavioral risk factors within a network of community mental health services. The results will inform future policy and practice regarding the ability of clinicians within mental health settings to improve preventive care provision as a result of such interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000693729.

The delivery of preventive care to clients of community health services.

BACKGROUND: Smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity are the primary behavioral risks for common causes of mortality and morbidity. Evidence and guidelines support routine clinician delivery of preventive care. Limited evidence describes the level delivered in community health settings. The objective was to determine the: prevalence of preventive care provided by community health clinicians; association between client and service characteristics and receipt of care; and acceptability of care. This will assist in informing interventions that facilitate adoption of opportunistic preventive care delivery to all clients. METHODS: In 2009 and 2010 a telephone survey was undertaken of 1284 clients across a network of 56 public community health facilities in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. The survey assessed receipt of preventive care (assessment, brief advice, and referral/follow-up) regarding smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol overconsumption, and physical inactivity; and acceptability of care. RESULTS: Care was most frequently reported for smoking (assessment: 59.9%, brief advice: 61.7%, and offer of referral to a telephone service: 4.5%) and least frequently for inadequate fruit or vegetable consumption (27.0%, 20.0% and 0.9% respectively). Sixteen percent reported assessment for all risks, 16.2% received brief advice for all risks, and 0.6% were offered a specific referral for all risks. The following were associated with increased care: diabetes services, number of appointments, being male, Aboriginal, unemployed, and socio-economically disadvantaged. Acceptability of preventive care was high (76.0%-95.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite strong client support, preventive care was not provided opportunistically to all, and was preferentially provided to select groups. This suggests a need for practice change strategies to enhance preventive care provision to achieve adherence to clinical guidelines.

Readiness to quit smoking and quit attempts among Australian mental health inpatients.

INTRODUCTION: Mental health inpatients smoke at higher rates than general population smokers. However, provision of nicotine-dependence treatment in inpatient settings is low, with barriers to the provision of such care including staff views that patients do not want to quit. This paper reports the findings of a survey of mental health inpatients at a psychiatric hospital in New South Wales, Australia, assessing smoking and quitting motivations and behaviors. METHODS: Smokers (n = 97) were surveyed within the inpatient setting using a structured survey tool, incorporating the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence, Reasons for Quitting Scale, Readiness and Motivation to Quit Smoking Questionnaire, and other measures of smoking and quitting behavior. RESULTS: Approximately 47% of smokers reported having made at least one quit attempt within the past 12 months, despite nearly three quarters (71.2%) being classified as in a "precontemplative" stage of change. Multinomial logistic regressions revealed that self-reporting "not enjoying being a smoker" and having made a quit attempt in the last 12 months predicted having advanced beyond a precontemplative stage of change. A high self-reported desire to quit predicted a quit attempt having been made in the last 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of smokers had made several quit attempts, with a large percentage occurring recently, suggesting that the actual quitting behavior should be considered as an important indication of the "desire to quit." This paper provides further data supporting the assertion that multimodal smoking cessation interventions combining psychosocial and pharmacological support should be provided to psychiatric inpatients who smoke.

The effectiveness of an intervention in increasing community health clinician provision of preventive care: a study protocol of a non-randomised, multiple-baseline trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary behavioural risks for the most common causes of mortality and morbidity in developed countries are tobacco smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity. Evidence, guidelines and policies support routine clinician delivery of care to prevent these risks within primary care settings. Despite the potential afforded by community health services for the delivery of such preventive care, the limited evidence available suggests it is provided at suboptimal levels. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic practice change intervention in increasing clinician's routine provision of preventive care across a network of community health services. METHODS/DESIGN: A multiple baseline study will be conducted involving all 56 community health facilities in a single health district in New South Wales, Australia. The facilities will be allocated to one of three administratively-defined groups. A 12 month practice change intervention will be implemented in all facilities in each group to facilitate clinician risk assessment of eligible clients, and clinician provision of brief advice and referral to those identified as being 'at risk'. The intervention will be implemented in a non-random sequence across the three facility groups. Repeated, cross-sectional measurement of clinician provision of preventive care for four individual risks (smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity) will occur continuously for all three facility groups for 54 months via telephone interviews. The interviews will be conducted with randomly selected clients who have visited a community health facility in the last two weeks. Data collection will commence 12 months prior to the implementation of the intervention in the first group, and continue for six months following the completion of the intervention in the last group. As a secondary source of data, telephone interviews will be undertaken prior to and following the intervention with randomly selected samples of clinicians from each facility group to assess the reported provision of preventive care, and the acceptability of the practice change intervention and implementation. DISCUSSION: The study will provide novel evidence regarding the ability to increase clinician's routine provision of preventive care across a network of community health facilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611001284954 UNIVERSAL TRIAL NUMBER (UTN): U1111-1126-3465.