Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2026
Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Stakeholder views on implementing a novel addiction screening and prevention tool in a hospital setting: A
Genevieve F Dash1, Emily Balcke1, Holly Poore1
1Rutgers Addiction Research Center, Brain Health Institute, Rutgers University, United States of America; Department of Psychiatry, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, United States of America.
Introduction:
Current best practice is for primary care physicians (PCPs) to screen patients for problematic substance use at checkups. However, this practice is not routine, is done in an unstandardized manner, and contributes to the overburdening of PCPs. Screening practices also target current, potentially problematic use behaviors, thus limiting their capacity to help patients prevent problems before they start. Recent scientific advances in identifying people at elevated risk for substance use problems as a means of facilitating prevention efforts have not yet been integrated into medical practice. To address these issues, our research team developed a freestanding platform called the Comprehensive Addiction Risk Evaluation System (CARES). CARES provides personalized information about genetic and behavioral/environmental risk for substance use disorder (SUD) and connects individuals to resources based on their risk profile. The present study evaluated the potential for adoption and implementation of CARES within a healthcare system through qualitative interviews with key stakeholders.
Methods:
Semi-structured interviews were developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and conducted with N = 15 interviewees. Transcripts were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis.
Results:
Key themes included perceived need for new SUD screening tools, current SUD screening procedures and their pros/cons, openness to new ideas and clinical tools, fit of CARES with organizational goals and priorities, considerations for use of CARES with adolescent populations, anticipated patient response to CARES, barriers to implementation and uptake of CARES, changes to CARES required for implementation, and possibility for integrating results from CARES into patient medical records. Interviewees generally expressed need for new screening tools and openness to using new tools, but expressed concern that existing provider burden, lack of SUD knowledge, and discomfort/stigma could stymie efforts to implement CARES.
Conclusions:
There is a clear need for a low-burden, easy-to-use tool for substance use prevention. CARES appears to be an acceptable and feasible approach to fill this gap. These findings will be used to inform pilot implementation of CARES in clinical care settings.