Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Patient-Reported Social Risks and Clinician Decision Making: Results of a Clinician Survey in Primary Care Community Health Centers

Arwen Bunce, Jenna Donovan, Megan Hoopes, Laura M. Gottlieb, Molly Krancari and Rachel Gold
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2023, 21 (2) 143-150; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2953
Arwen Bunce
1OCHIN Inc, Portland, Oregon
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: buncea@ochin.org
Jenna Donovan
1OCHIN Inc, Portland, Oregon
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Megan Hoopes
1OCHIN Inc, Portland, Oregon
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura M. Gottlieb
2Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Molly Krancari
1OCHIN Inc, Portland, Oregon
MPH, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachel Gold
1OCHIN Inc, Portland, Oregon
3Kaiser Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon
PhD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Clinician and Survey Summary (N = 38)

    CharacteristicData
    Credentials, No. (%)
      Physician  9 (23.7)
      Advanced practice providera29 (76.3)
    Sex, No. (%)
      Female33 (86.8)
      Male  5 (13.2)
    Number of surveys completed, mean (SD)16 (9.1)
    Ever used SDOH to inform care in surveyed encounters, No. (%)30 (78.9)
    Always used SDOH to inform care in surveyed encounters, No. (%)  2 (5.3)
    Never used SDOH to inform care in surveyed encounters, No. (%)  8 (21.1)
    • SDOH = social determinants of health.

    • Note: Clinicians came from 21 clinics nested within 14 health systems. Most clinics had 2 clinicians participate in the card study; 2 clinics only recruited 1 clinician and 2 clinics had usable data from only 1 clinician.

    • ↵a Nurse practitioner or physician assistant; 1 recruited clinician was a registered nurse.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Clinician, Encounter, and Patient Characteristics of Card Surveys

    CharacteristicsTotal Surveys, No. (%)
    (N = 610)
    SDOH Influenced Care, No. (%)
    (n = 212)
    SDOH Did Not Influence Care, No. (%)
    (n = 398)
    Clinicians
    Credentials
      Physician127 (20.8)  28 (13.2)  99 (24.9)
      Advanced practice providera483 (79.2)184 (86.8)299 (75.1)
    Sex
      Female547 (89.7)197 (92.9)350 (87.9)
      Male  63 (10.3)15 (7.1)  48 (12.1)
    Encounters
    Type
      In-person504 (82.6)179 (84.4)325 (81.7)
      Telehealth106 (17.4)  33 (15.6)  73 (18.3)
    Reason for visit
      Acute care152 (24.9)  53 (25.0)  99 (24.9)
      Behavioral health 15 (2.5)  3 (1.4)  12 (3.0)
      Chronic condition113 (18.5)  33 (15.6)  80 (20.1)
      Hospital follow-up 21 (3.4) 13 (6.1)  8 (2.0)
      Routine care309 (50.7)110 (51.9)199 (50.0)
    Insurance type
      Medicaid285 (46.7)101 (47.6)184 (46.2)
      Medicare132 (21.6)  33 (15.6)  99 (24.9)
      Private107 (17.5)  30 (14.2)  77 (19.3)
      Uninsured  86 (14.1)  48 (22.6)  38 (9.5)
    SDOH in EHR at encounter?
      Yes166 (27.2)  85 (40.1)  81 (20.4)
      No444 (72.8)127 (59.9)317 (79.6)
    Pre/post–COVID-19 pandemicb
      Pre318 (52.1)135 (63.7)183 (46.0)
      Post292 (47.9)  77 (36.3)215 (54.0)
    Patients
    Sex
      Female353 (57.9)109 (51.4)244 (61.3)
      Male257 (42.1)103 (48.6)154 (38.7)
    Age, y
      0-10  14 (2.3)  10 (4.7)    4 (1.0)
      11-18  23 (3.8)    8 (3.8)  15 (3.8)
      19-29  79 (13.0)  23 (10.8)  56 (14.1)
      30-39102 (16.7)  29 (13.7)  73 (18.3)
      40-49108 (17.7)  46 (21.7)  62 (15.6)
      50-59131 (21.5)  52 (24.5)  79 (19.8)
      ≥60153 (25.1)  44 (20.8)109 (27.4)
    Race/ethnicity
      Hispanic/Latine131 (21.5)  60 (28.3)  71 (17.8)
      Non-Hispanic White300 (49.2)  71 (33.5)229 (57.5)
      Non-Hispanic Black  82 (13.4)  38 (17.9)  44 (11.1)
      Non-Hispanic Asian  59 (9.7)  32 (15.1)  27 (6.8)
      Otherc  38 (6.2)  11 (5.2)  27 (6.8)
    Preferred language
      English457 (74.9)124 (58.5)333 (83.7)
      Spanish  96 (15.7)  52 (24.5)  44 (11.1)
      Nepali  26 (4.3)  22 (10.4)    4 (1.0)
      Chinese  13 (2.1)    2 (0.9)  11 (2.8)
      All others  18 (3.0)  12 (5.7)    6 (1.5)
    • EHR = electronic health record; SDOH = social determinants of health.

    • ↵a Nurse practitioner or physician assistant; 1 recruited clinician was a registered nurse.

    • ↵b Pre–COVID-19 pandemic for surveys completed before March 2020, post–COVID-19 for surveys completed after March 2020. No surveys completed in March 2020.

    • ↵c Other includes multiple races, American Indian, Alaska Native, or missing data.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Card Survey Questions and Responses

    Question and Response Options for All Surveys (N = 610)No. (%)a
    1.  Which of the following factors influenced the care you provided during this patient encounter? (Mark all that apply)
         Clinical factors (eg, history, laboratory results, medications, etc.)  548 (89.8)
         Patient-specific social and economic conditions (SDOH)  212 (34.8)b
         Patient preferences  450 (73.8)
         Available resources (eg, availability of specialty care, formulary restrictions, insurance requirements)  334 (54.8)
         Other (free text):c    57 (9.3)
            Language    28
            Education/(health) literacy/knowledge/understanding    15
            Transportation    15
            Financial/cost/(lack of) health insurance      9
            New patient      5
            Motivation      4
    Questions and Response Options for Surveys With Care Influenced by SDOH (n = 212)No. (%)a,d
    2.  How did you know this patient-specific SDOH information? (Mark all that apply)
          Prior personal knowledge of the patient  135 (63.7)
          Conversation with the patient during this encounter  161 (75.9)
          Communication from other clinic staff    38 (17.9)
          Review on paper SDOH screen    25 (11.9)
          Reviewed in EHR    97 (45.8)e
          Other      7 (3.3)
    3.  The amount of time it took to look up the patient-specific SDOH information was:
          Just right, didn’t take long at all  151 (71.2)
          Longer than I expected      5 (2.4)
          Too long, I gave up      1 (0.5)
          N/A, I didn’t try    46 (21.7)
          Other      9 (4.2)
    4.  Did you wish you had SDOH information that was not available?
          Yes    29 (13.7)
          No  182 (85.8)
          Missing      1 (0.5)
    5.  How much did the patient’s SDOH information influence the clinical decisions (eg, treatment decisions, medications prescribed) you made?
          A lot    73 (34.4)
          Somewhat  101 (47.6)
          Not at all    38 (17.9)
    6.  How much did the patient’s SDOH information influence any additional care you provided (eg, social service or behavioral health referrals, warm hand-offs)?
          A lot    54 (25.5)
          Somewhat    97 (45.8)
          Not at all    49 (23.1)
          Not applicable    12 (5.7)
    7.  Optional: How did your care change?f    26 (12.3)
          Referred to external low/no-cost programs for clinical care (eg, Imaging for a Cause, GoodRx)      8
          Identified need for case management or home health      4
          Adjusted follow-up schedule      4
          Adjusted medication orders due to cost/lack of insurance      3
          Considered mental health as potential source of symptoms or complicating factor      3
          Unable to help because the clinic doesn’t have necessary resources      2
          Called landlord regarding living conditions      1
          Connected patient with food assistance      1
    • EHR = electronic health record; SDOH = social determinants of health.

    • ↵a Some questions allowed multiple responses, thus numbers and percentages may not sum to total.

    • ↵b Of these surveys, 85 (40.1%) had standardized SDOH screening data in the patient’s EHR at time of encounter.

    • ↵c Each survey could have multiple free-text responses. Responses appearing in >3 surveys are reported and grouped thematically by authors.

    • ↵d Questions 2-6 were only asked on surveys that selected “patient-specific social and economic conditions (social determinants of health)” as a response to question 1.

    • ↵e Of these surveys, 45 (46.4%) had standardized SDOH screening data in the patient’s EHR at time of visit.

    • ↵f Multiple responses allowed. All responses reported and grouped thematically by authors.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Odds Of Card Survey Response Indicating SDOH Was Used to Inform Patient Care

    CharacteristicsUnadjusted ORa
    (95% CI)
    Adjusted ORb
    (95% CI)
    Clinicians
    Credentials
      Physicianref…
      Advanced practice providerc2.18 (0.71-6.66)…
    Sex
      Femaleref…
      Male0.56 (0.21-1.45)…
    Encounters
    Type
      Office visitref…
      Telehealth0.82 (0.27-2.54)…
    Reason for visit
      Acute carerefref
      Behavioral health0.45 (0.14-1.55)0.84 (0.23-3.14)
      Chronic condition0.77 (0.32-1.85)1.00 (0.40-2.44)
      Hospital follow-up3.04 (1.18-7.80)4.82 (1.62-14.67)
      Routine care1.03 (0.59-1.82)1.35 (0.73-2.46)
    Insurance type
      Medicarerefref
      Medicaid1.65 (0.83-3.26)1.24 (0.69-2.22)
      Private1.17 (0.65-2.11)1.15 (0.63-2.12)
      Uninsured3.79 (1.67-8.61)1.84 (0.84-4.02)
    SDOH in EHR at encounter?
      Yes2.62 (1.45-4.72)d3.18 (1.79-5.66)d
      Norefref
    Pre/post–COVID-19 pandemice
      Prerefref
      Post0.49 (0.18-1.31)1.03 (0.35-3.07)
    Patients
    Sex
      Femalerefref
      Male1.50 (0.98-2.29)1.75 (1.18-2.59)d
    Age, y
      <18ref–
      18-640.62 (0.20-1.97)–
      ≥650.42 (0.13-1.42)–
    Race/ethnicity
      Non-Hispanic Whiterefref
      Otherf2.69 (1.34-5.40)d1.50 (0.92-2.45)
    Preferred language
      Englishrefref
      Other3.64 (1.45-9.14)d3.49 (1.42-8.54)d
    • EHR = electronic health record; OR = odds ratio; SDOH = social determinants of health.

    • ↵a All models account for correlation within provider using a robust sandwich error adjustment.

    • ↵b Model adjusted for all covariates that had a univariate P value of ≤0.20 (SDOH screening in EHR, patient sex, race/ethnicity, preferred language, and pre/post COVID-19); model accounts for correlation within clinician using robust sandwich error adjustment.

    • ↵c Nurse practitioner or physician assistant; 1 recruited clinician was a registered nurse.

    • ↵d Significant at P ≤.05.

    • ↵e Pre–COVID-19 pandemic for surveys completed before March 2020, post–COVID-19 for surveys completed after March 2020. No surveys were completed in March 2020.

    • ↵f Includes Hispanic/Latine ethnicity, Black, Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, multiple races, and unknown race.

Additional Files

  • Tables
  • VISUAL ABSTRACT IN PNG FILE BELOW

    • 21.2_bunce_visualabstract_v06.png
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 21 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 21 (2)
Vol. 21, Issue 2
March/April 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Front Matter (PDF)
  • Plain-Language Article Summaries
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Patient-Reported Social Risks and Clinician Decision Making: Results of a Clinician Survey in Primary Care Community Health Centers
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
9 + 10 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Patient-Reported Social Risks and Clinician Decision Making: Results of a Clinician Survey in Primary Care Community Health Centers
Arwen Bunce, Jenna Donovan, Megan Hoopes, Laura M. Gottlieb, Molly Krancari, Rachel Gold
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2023, 21 (2) 143-150; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2953

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Patient-Reported Social Risks and Clinician Decision Making: Results of a Clinician Survey in Primary Care Community Health Centers
Arwen Bunce, Jenna Donovan, Megan Hoopes, Laura M. Gottlieb, Molly Krancari, Rachel Gold
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2023, 21 (2) 143-150; DOI: 10.1370/afm.2953
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • A Pilot Comparison of Clinical Data Collection Methods Using Paper, Electronic Health Record Prompt, and a Smartphone Application
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Performance-Based Reimbursement, Illegitimate Tasks, Moral Distress, and Quality Care in Primary Care: A Mediation Model of Longitudinal Data
  • Adverse Outcomes Associated With Inhaled Corticosteroid Use in Individuals With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
  • Family-Based Interventions to Promote Weight Management in Adults: Results From a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in India
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Person groups:
    • Vulnerable populations
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Health services
  • Other topics:
    • Health informatics
    • Communication / decision making
    • Disparities in health and health care

Keywords

  • card study
  • electronic health record
  • social determinants of health
  • social risk factors
  • surveys and questionaires

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine