RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jun 3;7(6):e2417994. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.17994.
Interventions that address needs such as low income, housing instability, and safety are increasingly appearing in the health care sector as part of multifaceted efforts to improve health and health equity, but evidence relevant to scaling these social needs interventions is limited.
To summarize the intensity and complexity of social needs interventions included in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and assess whether these RCTs were designed to measure the causal effects of intervention components on behavioral, health, or health care utilization outcomes.
This review of a scoping review was based on a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded evidence map of English-language US-based RCTs of social needs interventions published between January 1, 1995, and April 6, 2023. Studies were assessed for features related to intensity (defined using modal values as providing as-needed interaction, 8 participant contacts or more, contacts occurring every 2 weeks or more often, encounters of 30 minutes or longer, contacts over 6 months or longer, or home visits), complexity (defined as addressing multiple social needs, having dedicated staff, involving multiple intervention components or practitioners, aiming to change multiple participant behaviors [knowledge, action, or practice], requiring or providing resources or active assistance with resources, and permitting tailoring), and the ability to assess causal inferences of components (assessing interventions, comparators, and context).
This review of a scoping review of social needs interventions identified 77 RCTs in 93 publications with a total of 135 690 participants. Most articles (68 RCTs [88%]) reported 1 or more features of high intensity. All studies reported 1 or more features indicative of high complexity. Because most studies compared usual care with multicomponent interventions that were moderately or highly dependent on context and individual factors, their designs permitted causal inferences about overall effectiveness but not about individual components.
Social needs interventions are complex, intense, and include multiple components. Our findings suggest that RCTs of these interventions address overall intervention effectiveness but are rarely designed to distinguish the causal effects of specific components despite being resource intensive. Future studies with hybrid effectiveness-implementation and sequential designs, and more standardized reporting of intervention intensity and complexity could help stakeholders assess the return on investment of these interventions.
满足低收入、住房不稳定和安全等需求的干预措施越来越多地出现在医疗保健领域,作为改善健康和健康公平的多方面努力的一部分,但与扩大这些社会需求干预措施相关的证据有限。
总结随机临床试验 (RCT) 中包含的社会需求干预措施的强度和复杂性,并评估这些 RCT 是否旨在衡量干预措施对行为、健康或医疗保健利用结果的因果效应。
这是对一项范围审查的审查,该审查基于一项患者为中心的成果研究所资助的美国英语 RCT 的社会需求干预措施的证据图,这些 RCT 于 1995 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 4 月 6 日发表。研究评估了与强度相关的特征(使用模态值定义为按需互动、8 次以上参与者接触、每两周或更频繁发生的接触、30 分钟或更长时间的接触、6 个月或更长时间的接触或家访)、复杂性(定义为解决多个社会需求、有专门的工作人员、涉及多个干预组件或从业者、旨在改变多个参与者的行为[知识、行动或实践]、需要或提供资源或积极协助资源以及允许定制)以及评估组件因果推断的能力(评估干预措施、对照组和背景)。
这是对社会需求干预措施的范围审查的审查,确定了 77 项 RCT,发表在 93 篇论文中,共有 135690 名参与者。大多数文章(68 项 RCT [88%])报告了 1 项或多项高强度特征。所有研究都报告了 1 项或多项高度复杂的特征。由于大多数研究将常规护理与中度或高度依赖于环境和个人因素的多组件干预措施进行比较,因此它们的设计允许对整体效果进行因果推断,但不能对个别组件进行因果推断。
社会需求干预措施复杂、强度高,且包含多个组件。我们的研究结果表明,这些干预措施的 RCT 解决了整体干预效果,但很少设计用于区分特定组件的因果效应,尽管这些干预措施资源密集。未来的研究可以采用混合有效性-实施和序列设计,以及更标准化的干预强度和复杂性报告,这可以帮助利益相关者评估这些干预措施的投资回报。