7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      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

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial examined the effect of in-person social services navigation assistance vs a written information sheet on caregiver-reported social risk factors and child and caregiver health.

          Key Points

          Question

          Did in-person, longitudinal social services navigation assistance result in greater reduction in social risk factors and better health for children and caregivers than a less intensive approach?

          Findings

          In this randomized clinical trial including 611 caregiver-child dyads, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups in the effectiveness of the interventions. In post hoc secondary analyses of both groups, there were significant improvements in social risk factors and in child and caregiver health at 6-month follow-up.

          Meaning

          These findings suggest that delivery of curated, individualized written resources with or without longitudinal, in-person navigation services about social services in pediatric urgent care settings can affect family circumstances and child and caregiver health.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Social and economic contexts shape children’s short- and long-term health. Efforts to address contextual risk factors are increasingly incorporated into pediatric health care.

          Objective

          To compare the effectiveness of 2 social risk–related interventions.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This randomized clinical trial included English- and/or Spanish-speaking caregiver-child dyads recruited from a pediatric urgent care clinic nested in a large, urban, safety-net hospital. Study recruitment, enrollment, and follow-up were conducted from July 18, 2016, to March 8, 2019. Data analysis was conducted from January 1, 2019, to January 20, 2020.

          Interventions

          Following standardized social risk assessment, caregivers were randomly assigned to receive either written information regarding relevant government and community social services resources or comparable written information plus in-person assistance and follow-up focused on service access.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Caregiver-reported number of social risk factors and child health 6 months after enrollment.

          Results

          Among 611 caregiver-child dyads enrolled in the study, 302 dyads were randomized to the written resources group and 309 dyads were randomized to the written resources plus in-person assistance group. The mean (SD) age of children was 6.1 (5.0) years; 483 children (79.1%) were Hispanic; and 315 children (51.6%) were girls. There were no significant differences between groups in the effects of the interventions. In post hoc secondary analyses, the number of reported social risks decreased from baseline to 6-month follow-up in both groups: caregivers who received written resources alone reported a mean (SE) of 1.28 (0.19) fewer risks at follow-up, while those receiving written resources plus in-person assistance reported 1.74 (0.21) fewer risks at follow-up (both P < .001). In both groups, there were small but statistically significant improvements from baseline to follow-up in child health (mean [SE] change: written resources, 0.37 [0.07]; written resources plus in-person assistance, 0.24 [0.07]; both P < .001).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          This randomized clinical trial compared 2 approaches to addressing social risks in a pediatric urgent care setting and found no statistically significant differences in the social risk and child and caregiver health effects of providing written resources at the point of care with vs without in-person longitudinal navigation services. Caregivers in both groups reported fewer social risks and improved child and caregiver health 6 months after the intervention. These findings deepen understanding of effective doses of social risk–related interventions.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02746393

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptom Scales: a systematic review.

          Depression, anxiety and somatization are the most common mental disorders in primary care as well as medical specialty populations; each is present in at least 5-10% of patients and frequently comorbid with one another. An efficient means for measuring and monitoring all three conditions would be desirable. Evidence regarding the psychometric and pragmatic characteristics of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9 depression, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)-7 anxiety and PHQ-15 somatic symptom scales are synthesized from two sources: (1) four multisite cross-sectional studies (three conducted in primary care and one in obstetric-gynecology practices) comprising 9740 patients, and (2) key studies from the literature that have studied these scales. The PHQ-9 and its abbreviated eight-item (PHQ-8) and two-item (PHQ-2) versions have good sensitivity and specificity for detecting depressive disorders. Likewise, the GAD-7 and its abbreviated two-item (GAD-2) version have good operating characteristics for detecting generalized anxiety, panic, social anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. The optimal cutpoint is > or = 10 on the parent scales (PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and > or = 3 on the ultra-brief versions (PHQ-2 and GAD-2). The PHQ-15 is equal or superior to other brief measures for assessing somatic symptoms and screening for somatoform disorders. Cutpoints of 5, 10 and 15 represent mild, moderate and severe symptom levels on all three scales. Sensitivity to change is well-established for the PHQ-9 and emerging albeit not yet definitive for the GAD-7 and PHQ-15. The PHQ-9, GAD-7 and PHQ-15 are brief well-validated measures for detecting and monitoring depression, anxiety and somatization. Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Who's Stressed? Distributions of Psychological Stress in the United States in Probability Samples from 1983, 2006, and 20091

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Accountable Health Communities--Addressing Social Needs through Medicare and Medicaid.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                10 March 2020
                March 2020
                10 March 2020
                : 3
                : 3
                : e200701
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Social Interventions Research and Evaluation Network, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
                [2 ]School of Nursing, Department of Family Health Care Nursing, University of California, San Francisco
                [3 ]San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California
                [4 ]Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco
                [5 ]Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
                [6 ]Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: January 20, 2020.
                Published: March 10, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0701
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Gottlieb LM et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Laura M. Gottlieb, MD, MPH, Social Interventions Research and Evaluation Network, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California St, Ste 465, San Francisco, CA 94118 ( laura.gottlieb@ 123456ucsf.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Gottlieb and Hessler had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Gottlieb, Adler, Wing, Keeton, Hessler.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Gottlieb, Adler, Wing, Velazquez, Romero, Hernandez, Munoz Vera, Urrutia Caceres, Arevalo, Herrera, Bernal Suarez, Hessler.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Gottlieb, Wing, Hessler.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Gottlieb, Hessler.
                Obtained funding: Gottlieb, Adler.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Gottlieb, Wing, Romero, Hernandez, Munoz Vera, Hessler.
                Supervision: Gottlieb, Wing, Hessler.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Gottlieb reported receiving grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Episcopal Health Foundation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Commonwealth Fund, and Kaiser Permanente outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: The Lisa and John Pritzker Family Fund and the Toxic Stress Research Network funded by the JPB Foundation of New York financially supported this study.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Additional Contributions: Anais Amaya, BA (Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California), helped to train and supervise health advocates and was compensated for her work. Ellen Laves, MD (Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco), facilitated study activities in the pediatrics urgent care clinic and did not receive compensation.
                Article
                zoi200046
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0701
                7064877
                32154888
                e89de40f-f095-4e9b-89b5-c084d07e9846
                Copyright 2020 Gottlieb LM et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 26 September 2019
                : 20 January 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Pediatrics

                Comments

                Comment on this article