title: Perspectives of family physicians on computer-assisted health-risk assessments.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The firsthand experience of physicians using computer-assisted health-risk assessment is salient for designing practical eHealth solutions.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to enhance understanding about computer-assisted health-risk assessments from physicians' perspectives after completion of a trial at a Canadian, urban, multi-doctor, hospital-affiliated family practice clinic.
  
  
  METHODS
  A qualitative approach of face-to-face, in-depth, semi-structured interviews was used. All interviews were audio recorded and field notes taken. Analytic induction and constant comparative techniques were used for coding and analyses. Interpretation was facilitated by peer audit and insights gained from the social exchange theoretical perspective.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Ten physicians (seven female and three male) participated in the interviews. Three overarching themes emerged in relation to computer-assisted health-risk assessments: (1) perceived benefits, (2) perceived concerns or challenges, and (3) feasibility. Physicians unanimously acknowledged the potential of computer-assisted health-risk assessments to open dialogue on psychosocial health risks. They also appreciated the general facilitative roles of the tool, such as improving time-efficiency by asking questions on health risks prior to the consultation and triggering patients' self-reflections on the risks. However, in the context of ongoing physician-patient relationships, physicians expressed concerns about the impact of the computer-assisted health-risk assessment tool on visit time, patient readiness to talk about psychosocial issues when the purpose of the visit was different, and the suitability of such risk assessment for all visits to detect new risk information. In terms of feasibility, physicians displayed general acceptance of the risk assessment tool but considered it most feasible for periodic health exams and follow-up visits based on their perceived concerns or challenges and the resources needed to implement such programs. These included clinic level (staff training, space, confidentiality) and organizational level (time, commitment and finances) support.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Participants perceived computer-assisted health-risk assessment as a useful tool in family practice, particularly for identifying psychosocial issues. Physicians displayed a general acceptance of the computer tool and indicated its greater feasibility for periodic health exams and follow-up visits than all visits. Future physician training on psychosocial issues should address physicians' concerns by emphasizing the varying forms of "clinical success" for the management of chronic psychosocial issues. Future research is needed to examine the best ways to implement this program in diverse clinical settings and patient populations.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00385034; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00385034 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/5pV8AGRgt).
authors.affiliation: Social and Behavioral Health Sciences Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. farah.ahmad@utoronto.ca
authors.forename: Farah
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Ahmad
authors.forename: Harvey A
authors.initials: HA
authors.lastname: Skinner
authors.forename: Donna E
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Stewart
authors.forename: Wendy
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Levinson
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003658:Decision Making, Computer-Assisted; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006305:Health Status Indicators; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009864:Ontario; D010821:Physicians, Family / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011159:Population Surveillance; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2009 Feb 26;11(1):e7
references.pmid: 19275983
references.citation: BMJ. 1995 Jul 1;311(6996):42-5
references.pmid: 7613329
references.citation: Patient Educ Couns. 1987 Aug;10(1):3-23
references.pmid: 10283624
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1107-14
references.pmid: 16717173
references.citation: Encephale. 2007 Sep;33(4 Pt 1):552-60
references.pmid: 18033142
references.citation: JAMA. 1999 Aug 4;282(5):468-74
references.pmid: 10442663
references.citation: J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2000 Feb;11(1):33-44
references.pmid: 10778041
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 2000 Nov;19(4):230-7
references.pmid: 11064226
references.citation: BMC Womens Health. 2004 Aug 25;4 Suppl 1:S19
references.pmid: 15345082
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2002 Apr;54(8):1167-80
references.pmid: 11989955
references.citation: Public Health Nurs. 2006 May-Jun;23(3):271-6
references.pmid: 16684206
references.citation: JAMA. 2006 Aug 2;296(5):530-6
references.pmid: 16882959
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2008 May 15;10(2):e13
references.pmid: 18487137
references.citation: J Clin Psychiatry. 1997;58 Suppl 1:5-10
references.pmid: 9054902
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 1990 Sep 15;113(6):419-22
references.pmid: 2201233
references.citation: Br Med J. 1976 Sep 11;2(6036):623-5
references.pmid: 786434
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2009 Mar 30;11(1):e10
references.pmid: 21821504
references.citation: JAMA. 2002 Aug 14;288(6):756-64
references.pmid: 12169083
references.citation: BMJ. 1995 Jul 22;311(6999):251-3
references.pmid: 7627048
references.citation: Women Health. 2002;35(2-3):1-22
references.pmid: 12201501
references.citation: JAMA. 1992 Sep 9;268(10):1301-5
references.pmid: 1507376
references.citation: J Fam Pract. 1999 Jun;48(6):464-70
references.pmid: 10386491
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Nov;40(5):476-84
references.pmid: 12399790
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 1989 Nov-Dec;5(6):353-9
references.pmid: 2597431
references.citation: Health Forum J. 2003 Winter;46(1):8-13, 1
references.pmid: 12690711
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2006 Jan 9;166(1):22-37
references.pmid: 16401807
references.citation: J Fam Pract. 1993 Feb;36(2):185-91
references.pmid: 8426138
references.citation: Ann Fam Med. 2004 May-Jun;2(3):231-9
references.pmid: 15209200
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2008 Aug 25;10(3):e22
references.pmid: 18725354
references.citation: JAMA. 1992 Jun 17;267(23):3157-60
references.pmid: 1593735
references.citation: J Med Internet Res. 2008 Apr 18;10(2):e11
references.pmid: 18440918
references.citation: Science. 1998 May 8;280(5365):867-73
references.pmid: 9572724
references.citation: Health Educ Monogr. 1977 Winter;5(4):281-315
references.pmid: 346537
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1982 Jul;43(1):5-21
references.pmid: 7108745
references.citation: Diabetes Educ. 1994 Jan-Feb;20(1):29-34
references.pmid: 8137701
references.citation: Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985 Jan 19;290(6463):212-4
references.pmid: 3917757
references.citation: Ann Fam Med. 2005 May-Jun;3(3):248-54
references.pmid: 15928229
references.citation: J Soc Policy. 1990 Apr;19(2):169-90
references.pmid: 10106598
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2009 Jul 21;151(2):93-102
references.pmid: 19487706
references.citation: Ann Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;37(3):284-91
references.pmid: 11223765
references.citation: BMJ. 2002 Feb 2;324(7332):271
references.pmid: 11823359
references.citation: Qual Health Res. 2002 Mar;12(3):388-98
references.pmid: 11918103
references.citation: Womens Health Issues. 2001 May-Jun;11(3):244-58
references.pmid: 11336864
references.citation: J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2000 May;9(4):405-11
references.pmid: 10868613