Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai

Dr. Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A4, Canada

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
30 October 2020 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DWDavid Wiljer
David Wiljer
JSJenny Shi
Jenny Shi
BLBrian Lo
Brian Lo
MSMarcos Sanches
Marcos Sanches
EHElisa Hollenberg
Elisa Hollenberg
AVAristotle Voineskos
Aristotle Voineskos
Background: Mental health disorders are the most prevalent health issues among postsecondary students, yet few solutions to this emerging crisis exist. While mobile health technologies are touted as promising solutions for the unmet mental health needs of these students, the efficacy of these tools remains unclear. In response to these gaps, this study evaluates Thought Spot, a mobile and web app created through participatory design research. Objective: The goal of the research is to examine the impact of Thought Spot on mental health and wellness help-seeking intentions, behaviors, attitudes, self-stigma, and self-efficacy among postsecondary students in Canada. Methods: A 2-armed randomized controlled trial involving students from three postsecondary institutions was conducted. Students were eligible if they were aged 17 to 29 years, enrolled in full-time or part-time studies, functionally competent in English, and had access to a compatible digital device. The usual care group received a mental health services information pamphlet. The intervention group received the Thought Spot app on their digital device. Thought Spot is a standalone app that allows users to add, review, and search crowdsourced information about nearby mental health and wellness services. Users can also track their mood on the app. Outcomes were self-assessed through questionnaires collected at baseline and 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome was change in formal help-seeking intentions from baseline to 6 months, measured by the General Help-Seeking Questionnaire. A mixed-effects model was used to compare the impact of usual care and intervention on the primary outcome (formal help-seeking intentions). Secondary outcomes included changes in informal help-seeking intentions and help-seeking behaviors, help-seeking attitudes, self-stigma, and self-efficacy. Results: A total of 481 students were randomized into two groups: 240 to usual care, and 241 to the intervention group. There were no significant differences in help-seeking intentions between the usual care and intervention groups over 6 months (F2,877=0.85; P=.43, f=0.04). Both groups demonstrated similar increases in formal help-seeking intentions at 3 and 6 months (F2,877=23.52; P<.001, f=0.21). Compared with males, females sought more help from formal resources (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.22 to 2.83, P=.001). Females were less likely to seek help from informal sources than males (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73, P<.001). Conclusions: Prompting postsecondary students about mental health and help-seeking appears to increase help-seeking intentions. mHealth interventions may be as effective as information pamphlets in increasing formal help-seeking but may confer a small advantage in driving help-seeking from informal sources. Although there is enthusiasm, developers and health policy experts should exercise caution and thoroughly evaluate these types of digital tools. Future studies should explore the cost-effectiveness of digital interventions and develop strategies for improving their efficacy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03412461; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03412461 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/resprot.6446

1 January 2019 in Journal of Gynecologic Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
STSiriwan Tangjitgamol
Siriwan Tangjitgamol
ETEkkasit Tharavichitkul
Ekkasit Tharavichitkul
CTChokaew Tovanabutra
Chokaew Tovanabutra
KRKanisa Rongsriyam
Kanisa Rongsriyam
TATussawan Asakij
Tussawan Asakij
VLVichan Lorvidhaya
Vichan Lorvidhaya
Tangjitgamol S, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Apr;30(4):e82. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2019.30.e82

17 July 2018 in BMC Psychiatry
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMShelley F. McMain
Shelley F. McMain
ACAlexander L. Chapman
Alexander L. Chapman
JKJanice R. Kuo
Janice R. Kuo
TGTim Guimond
Tim Guimond
DSDavid L. Streiner
David L. Streiner
JHJeffrey S Hoch
Jeffrey S Hoch
Although Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) is an evidence-based psychosocial treatment for borderline personality disorder (BPD), the demand for it exceeds available resources. The commonly researched 12-month version of DBT is lengthy; this can pose a barrier to its adoption in many health care settings. Further, there are no data on the optimal length of psychotherapy for BPD. The aim of this study is to examine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 6 versus 12 months of DBT for chronically suicidal individuals with BPD. A second aim of this study is to determine which patients are as likely to benefit from shorter treatment as from longer treatment. Powered for non-inferiority testing, this two-site single-blind trial involves the random assignment of 240 patients diagnosed with BPD to 6 or 12 months of standard DBT. The primary outcome is the frequency of suicidal or non-suicidal self-injurious episodes. Secondary outcomes include healthcare utilization, psychiatric and emotional symptoms, general and social functioning, and health status. Cost-effectiveness outcomes will include the cost of providing each treatment as well as health care and societal costs (e.g., missed work days and lost productivity). Assessments are scheduled at pretreatment and at 3-month intervals until 24 months. This is the first study to directly examine the dose-effect of psychotherapy for chronically suicidal individuals diagnosed with BPD. Examining both clinical and cost effectiveness in 6 versus 12 months of DBT will produce answers to the question of how much treatment is good enough. Information from this study will help to guide decisions about the allocation of scarce treatment resources and recommendations about the benefits of briefer treatment. NCT02387736 . Registered February 20, 2015.

22 April 2015 in BMC Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ATAndrea C Tricco
Andrea C Tricco
ECElise Cogo
Elise Cogo
Wanrudee IsaranuwatchaiWanrudee Isaranuwatchai
Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai
PKPaul A Khan
Paul A Khan
GSGeetha Sanmugalingham
Geetha Sanmugalingham
SSSharon E Straus
Sharon E Straus
Complex wounds present a substantial economic burden on healthcare systems, costing billions of dollars annually in North America alone. The prevalence of complex wounds is a significant patient and societal healthcare concern and cost-effective wound care management remains unclear. This article summarizes the cost-effectiveness of interventions for complex wound care through a systematic review of the evidence base. We searched multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) for cost-effectiveness studies that examined adults treated for complex wounds. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, abstracted data from full-text articles, and assessed methodological quality using the Drummond 10-item methodological quality tool. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were reported, or, if not reported, calculated and converted to United States Dollars for the year 2013. Overall, 59 cost-effectiveness analyses were included; 71% (42 out of 59) of the included studies scored 8 or more points on the Drummond 10-item checklist tool. Based on these, 22 interventions were found to be more effective and less costly (i.e., dominant) compared to the study comparators: 9 for diabetic ulcers, 8 for venous ulcers, 3 for pressure ulcers, 1 for mixed venous and venous/arterial ulcers, and 1 for mixed complex wound types. Our results can be used by decision-makers in maximizing the deployment of clinically effective and resource efficient wound care interventions. Our analysis also highlights specific treatments that are not cost-effective, thereby indicating areas of resource savings. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0288-5

10 October 2017 in Trials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Karen BenziesKaren Benzies
Karen Benzies
VSVibhuti Shah
Vibhuti Shah
KAKhalid Aziz
Khalid Aziz
Wanrudee IsaranuwatchaiWanrudee Isaranuwatchai
Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai
LPLuz Palacio-Derflingher
Luz Palacio-Derflingher
ALAbhay Lodha
Abhay Lodha
Background: Every year, about 15 million of the world’s infants are born preterm (before 37 weeks gestation). In Alberta, the preterm birth rate was 8.7% in 2015, the second highest among Canadian provinces. Approximately 20% of preterm infants are born before 32 weeks gestation (early preterm), and require care in a Level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU); 80% are born moderate (32 weeks and zero days [320/7] to 336/7 weeks) and late preterm (340/7 to 366/7 weeks), and require care in a Level II NICU. Preterm birth and experiences in the NICU disrupt early parent-infant relationships and induce parental psychosocial distress. Family Integrated Care (FICare) shows promise as a model of care in Level III NICUs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate length of stay, infant and maternal clinical outcomes, and costs following adaptation and implementation of FICare in Level II NICUs. Methods: We will conduct a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) in ten Alberta Level II NICUs allocated to one of two groups: FICare or standard care. The FICare Alberta model involves three theoretically-based, standardized components: information sharing, parenting education, and family support. Our sample size of 181 mother-infant dyads per group is based on the primary outcome of NICU length of stay, 80% participation, and 80% retention at follow-up. Secondary outcomes (e.g., infant clinical outcomes and maternal psychosocial distress) will be assessed shortly after admission to NICU, at discharge and 2 months corrected age. We will conduct economic analysis from two perspectives: the public healthcare payer and society. To understand the utility, acceptability, and impact of FICare, qualitative interviews will be conducted with a subset of mothers at the 2-month follow-up, and with hospital administrators and healthcare providers near the end of the study. Discussion: Results of this pragmatic cRCT of FICare in Alberta Level II NICUs will inform policy decisions by providing evidence about the clinical effectiveness and costs of FICare. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02879799. Registered on 27 May 2016. Protocol version: 9 June 2016; version 2.

28 January 2020 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Wanrudee IsaranuwatchaiWanrudee Isaranuwatchai
Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai
Yot TeerawattananonYot Teerawattananon
Yot Teerawattananon
RARachel A Archer
Rachel A Archer
ALAlia Luz
Alia Luz
MSManushi Sharma
Manushi Sharma
ACAnthony J Culyer
Anthony J Culyer
Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai and colleagues highlight the importance of local context in making decisions about implementing interventions for preventing non-communicable diseases