Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice and BioMed Central.

This article is part of the supplement: International Network on Brief Interventions for Alcohol and Other Drugs (INEBRIA) Meeting 2011

Open Access Meeting abstract

Limitations to implementing alcohol screening with an electronic clinical reminder in the Veterans Affairs health-care system: a qualitative study

Emily Williams1*, Carol Achtmeyer1, Rachel Thomas1, Joel Grossbard2, Gwen Lapham1, Laura Johnson1, Evette Ludman3, Douglas Berger4 and Katharine Bradley3

  • * Corresponding author: Emily Williams

Author Affiliations

1 Veterans Affairs Puget Sound and the Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

2 Veterans Affairs Puget Sound and the Department of Psychiatry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

3 Group Health Cooperative, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

4 Veterans Affairs Puget Sound and the Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice 2012, 7(Suppl 1):A94  doi:10.1186/1940-0640-7-S1-A94


The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.ascpjournal.org/content/7/S1/A94


Published:9 October 2012

© 2012 Williams et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Meeting abstract

Implementation of alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is a prevention priority. The Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System uses a clinical reminder (CR) in the electronic medical record to prompt and document results of screening and trigger a subsequent CR for BI when screening is positive. Although screening rates are over 90%, marked variability in screening quality has been documented. Four researchers observed clinician interactions with CRs during alcohol screening at nine primary care clinics in the northwest US to identify barriers and facilitators to using CRs to implement quality screening. Observers took handwritten notes, which were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively using an a priori coding template adapted during analyses. We observed 58 support staff (25 registered nurses, 26 licensed practical nurses, and seven health technicians) caring for 166 patients. Alcohol screening prompted by the CR was often uncomfortable and of low quality. Clinicians often offered disclaimers prior to screening or made adjustments to how questions were presented, with some citing the sensitive nature of the questions. Verbal screening typically did not include asking questions verbatim. There was substantial variability in methods of conducting screening across clinics, with some using the CR to facilitate in-person screening by interview and others entering patient responses into the CR after completion of a paper-based screen. Although the CR was designed to trigger a subsequent CR for BI when positive, some clinics used paper encounter forms for this. Findings suggest that VA CRs have important limitations as a method of facilitating effective, high-quality alcohol screening. Barriers observed reflect a combination of limitations of CR technology (and the alcohol screening CR specifically), ways the CR was implemented, clinical workflow, complexity of patient needs, and alcohol-related stigma. Future research should address these barriers to effectively implement recommended care.