Grant: $447,509 - National Institutes of Health - Sep. 22, 2009
0% voted satisfied - 100% voted not satisfied - 3 vote(s) cast
Award Description: Computer Assisted Guidance for Tobacco Dependence Interventions in Dental Offices Electronic health records (EDR) represent a powerful tool for incorporating best practice guidelines into the dental treatment encounter through the use of clinical decision support tools. Recent legislation, Title XIII - Health Information Technology (the HITECH Act), provides clear guidance for health information technology (HIT) by adopting the term ?qualified? electronic health record as containing demographic and clinical health information and having the capacity to provide clinical decision support. A good example is the delivery of a tobacco intervention program during the patient?s dental office visit. While HIT can facilitate this process, computer-assisted guidance for provider-delivered tobacco interventions need to be carefully evaluated for their effectiveness. An important first step is studying how dental professionals interact with electronic records. The project team completed this step through a prior NIDCR funded R21 grant that included observations of provider utilization of an EDR system and feedback collected from several focus groups regarding clinicians? attitudes towards the use of EDRs in initiating tobacco cessation interventions with their patients. From these results the investigators designed support tools to assist dental providers in initiating a tobacco cessation intervention. Screening for drug use, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) are key components of the proposed intervention. This project will address the goal of this priority area using a prospective study of computer assisted guidance to assist dental providers in delivering a tobacco cessation intervention taking advantage of the ?teachable moment? when assessing patients for periodontal disease and oral cancer. We will modify the EDR system to incorporate the designed intervention and measure the delivery of a tobacco intervention compared to a control group. Aim 1) Compare the frequency of provider questions to assess interest in quitting in clinics utilizing computer assisted guidance tools compared to control clinics without these tools. Hypothesis 1: Providers in clinics utilizing computer assisted guidance tools assess the interest in quitting more frequently compared to control clinics as measured by the patient survey. Aim 2) Compare the frequency of a provider delivered brief tobacco intervention and referral to treatment for tobacco cessation in clinics utilizing computer assisted guidance tools compared to control clinics without these tools. Hypothesis 2: Providers in clinics utilizing computer assisted guidance tools will deliver brief tobacco interventions and referral to treatment for tobacco cessation more frequently than control clinics as measured by the patient survey. Hypothesis 3: Providers in clinics utilizing computer assisted guidance tools will deliver brief tobacco interventions and referral to treatment for tobacco cessation more frequently than control clinics as measured by the provider recording the delivery of an intervention in the dental record. Aim 3). Compare patient perceived value of the provider-patient encounter regarding the tobacco intervention in clinics utilizing computer-assisted guidance tools compared to control clinics without these tools. Hypothesis 4: Providers in clinics utilizing computer-assisted guidance tools will have a richer encounter as measured by the perceived usefulness of these tools by the provider and the patient.
Project Description: Since the notice of award on 9/22/09, the study was granted initial approval for study development and kick-off organizational and budget meetings took place (10/01/09). The study team (including outside consultants) assembled for the first project meeting (9/24/09) at which workgroups were established and given their charge. Workgroups met (10/01/09) to develop project goals associated with measurement and changes to the Electronic Dental Record (EDR) tool to guide investigation associated with both Aim 1 (provider behavior) and Aim 2 (patient perceptions). A second study team meeting (10/08/09) addressed reporting of workgroup progress and clarification of the roles of the coordinator and programmer/analyst.
Jobs Summary: N/A (Total jobs reported: 0)
Project Status: Less Than 50% Completed
This award's data was last updated on Sep. 22, 2009. Help expand these official descriptions using the wiki below.