Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Aug 20;21(5):1170-1174.
doi: 10.5811/westjem.2020.5.46536.

Improving Understanding of Screening Questions for Social Risk and Social Need Among Emergency Department Patients

Affiliations

Improving Understanding of Screening Questions for Social Risk and Social Need Among Emergency Department Patients

Gia Ciccolo et al. West J Emerg Med. .

Abstract

Introduction: With recent healthcare policy changes, including the creation of accountable care organizations, screening for social risks such as food and housing insecurity has become increasingly common in the healthcare system. However, the wide variety of different tools used for screening makes it challenging to compare across systems. In addition, the majority of tools used to measure social risks have only been tested in primary care settings and may not be optimal for emergency department (ED) use. Therefore, the goal of this study was to create a brief social screening tool for use in EDs.

Methods: We developed an initial tool using publicly available questions corresponding to the five core categories of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Accountable Health Communities Screening Tool. Iterative cycles of cognitive interviews with purposively sampled participants were performed using a hybrid model of think-aloud and verbal probing to understand/experience answering questions and potential comprehension challenges. After thematic saturation was reached in one cycle, the tool was changed per participant input; cycles were completed until thematic saturation was reached overall.

Results: A total of 16 participants (six patient guardians and 10 patients) completed cognitive interviews throughout three cycles. Participant feedback included suggestions for further clarification and simplification of survey questions for improved comprehension. The survey was thus reduced and simplified from 16 questions concerning five domains to 10 questions concerning four domains.

Conclusion: We used an iterative cognitive interviewing process to develop a social screening tool for use in EDs. This process demonstrates the importance of patient input to refine questionnaires, and provides a brief screening tool for ED use.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: By the WestJEM article submission agreement, all authors are required to disclose all affiliations, funding sources and financial or management relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias. This work was supported by the Emergency Medicine Foundation. Dr. Samuels-Kalow is supported by the Harvard Catalyst | The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Award UL 1TR002541) and financial contributions from Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers, or the National Institutes of Health. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Garg A, Sheldrick RC, Dworkin PH. The inherent fallibility of validated screening tools for social determinants of health. Acad Pediatr. 2018;18(2):123–4. - PubMed
    1. Center for Health Care Strategies Inc. Prioritizing social determinants of health in Medicaid ACO programs: a conversation with two pioneering states. 2018. [Accessed June 13, 2018]. Available at: https://www.chcs.org/prioritizing-social-determinants-health-medicaid-ac...
    1. Billioux A, Verlander K, Anthony S, et al. Standardized screening for health-related social needs in clinical settings: the accountable health communities screening tool. 2017. [Accessed August 14, 2019]. Available at: https://nam.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Standardized-Screening-for-He....
    1. Alderwick H, Gottlieb LM. Meanings and misunderstandings: a social determinants of health lexicon for health care systems. Milbank Q. 2019;97(2):407–19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Malecha PW, Williams JH, Kunzler NM, et al. Material needs of emergency department patients: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med. 2018;25(3):330–59. - PubMed

MeSH terms