Primary care - mental health collaboration: an example of assessing usual practice and potential barriers

A Qualitative Investigation of Characteristics Impacting Clinical Decision-Making in Integrated Behavioral Health Care

To support implementation of integrated behavioral health care (IBHC) models in local settings, providers may benefit from clinical decision-making support. The present analysis examines perspectives on patient characteristics appropriate or inappropriate for, and currently managed within, IBHC at a large medical center to inform recommendations for provider decision-making. Twenty-four participants (n = 13 primary care providers; n = 6 behavioral health providers; n = 5 administrators) in an IBHC setting were interviewed. Thematic analysis was conducted with acceptable interrater reliability (κ = 0.75). Responses indicated behavioral health symptom and patient characteristics that impact perceptions of appropriateness for management in IBHC, with high variability between providers. Many patients with characteristics identified as inappropriate for IBHC were nonetheless currently managed in IBHC. Interactions between patient ability to engage in care and provider ability to manage patient needs guided decisions to refer a patient to IBHC or specialty care. A heuristic representing this dimensional approach to clinical decision-making is presented to suggest provider decision-making guidance informed by both patient and provider ability.

Health system facilitators and barriers to the integration of mental health services into primary care in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a multimethod study

BACKGROUND

The integration of mental health into primary care-i.e., the process by which a range of essential mental health care and services are made available in existing multipurpose health care settings that did not previously provide them-can be facilitated or hindered by several health system factors that are still poorly understood. This study aimed to identify health system facilitators and barriers to the integration of mental health services into primary care in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to improve the success rate of integration programs.

METHODS

We conducted a multimethod, cross-sectional exploratory study. Stakeholders (managers, health service providers, service users, etc.) from sixteen of the twenty-six provinces of the DRC participated. We collected qualitative data through 31 individual, semistructured, face-to-face key informant interviews. We then collected quantitative data through a population-based survey of 413 respondents. We analyzed the interviews via thematic analysis, assigning verbatims to predefined themes and subthemes. For the survey responses, we performed descriptive analysis followed by binomial logistic regression to explore the associations between the variables of interest.

RESULTS

Strong leadership commitment, positive attitudes toward mental health care, the availability of care protocols, mental health task sharing (p < 0.001), and sufficient numbers of primary care providers (PCPs) (p < 0.001) were identified as key health system facilitators of successful integration. However, barriers to integration are mainly related to a poor understanding of what integration is and what it is not, as well as to the poor functionality and performance of health facilities. In addition, stigma, low prioritization of mental health, lack of mental health referents, low retention rate of trained health professionals, lack of reporting tools, lack of standardized national guidelines for integration (p < 0.001), lack of funding (p < 0.001), shortage of mental health specialists to coach PCPs (p < 0.001), and lack of psychotropic medications (p < 0.001) were identified as health system barriers to integration.

CONCLUSION

Improving the functionality of primary care settings before integrating mental health care would be beneficial for greater success. In addition, addressing identified barriers, such as lack of funding and mental health-related stigma, requires multistakeholder action across all building blocks of the health system.

Informative value of referral letters from general practice for child and adolescent mental healthcare

Although referral letters (RLs) form a nodal point in a patient's care journey, little is known about their informative value in child and adolescent mental healthcare. To determine the informative value of RLs to child and adolescent psychiatry, we conducted a chart review in medical records of minors registered at specialized mental healthcare between January 2015 and December 2017 (The Netherlands). Symptoms indicated in RLs originating from general practice (N = 723) were coded and cross-tabulated with the best estimate clinical classifications made in psychiatry. Results revealed that over half of the minors in the sample were classified in concordance with at least one reason for referral. We found fair to excellent discriminative ability for indications made in RLs concerning the most common psychiatric classifications (95% CI AUC: 60.9-70.6 for anxiety disorders to 90.5-100.0 for eating disorders). Logistic regression analyses suggested no statistically significant effects of gender, age, severity or mental healthcare history, with the exception of age and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders (ADHD), as RLs better predicted ADHD with increasing age (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.03-1.27). Contextual problems, such as difficulties studying, problems with parents or being bullied were indicated frequently and associated with classifications in various disorder groups. To conclude, general practitioners' RLs showed informative value, contrary to common beliefs. Replication studies are needed to reliably incorporate RLs into the diagnostic work-up.

Values Underpinning Integrated, People-Centred Health Services: Similarities and Differences among Actor Groups Across Europe

Introduction:

In addition to the functional aspects of healthcare integration, an understanding of its normative aspects is needed. This study explores the importance of values underpinning integrated, people-centred health services, and examines similarities and differences among the values prioritised by actors across Europe.

Methods:

Explorative cross-sectional design with quantitative analysis. A questionnaire of 18 values was conducted across Europe. A total of 1,013 respondents indicated the importance of each of the values on a nine-point scale and selected three most important values. Respondents were clustered in four actor groups, and countries in four European sub-regions.

Results:

The importance scores of values ranged from 7.62 to 8.55 on a nine-point scale. Statistically significant differences among actor groups were found for ten values. Statistically significant differences across European sub-regions were found for six values. Our analysis revealed two clusters of values: ‘people related’ and ‘governance and organisation’.

Discussion and conclusion:

The study found that all 18 values in the set are considered important by the respondents. Additionally, it revealed distinctions in emphasis among the values prioritised by actor groups and across sub-regions. The study uncovered two clusters of values that contribute to a conceptually based definition of integrated, people-centred health services.

Competencies to promote collaboration between primary and secondary care doctors: an integrative review

Background

In a society where ageing of the population and the increasing prevalence of long-term conditions are major issues, collaboration between primary and secondary care is essential to provide continuous, patient-centred care. Doctors play an essential role at the primary-secondary care interface in realising ‘seamless’ care. Therefore, they should possess collaborative competencies. However, knowledge about these collaborative competencies is scarce. In this review we explore what competencies doctors need to promote collaboration between doctors at the primary-secondary care interface.

Methods

We conducted an integrative literature review. After a systematic search 44 articles were included in the review. They were analysed using a thematic analysis approach.

Results

We identified six themes regarding collaborative competencies: ‘patient-centred care: a common concern’, ‘roles and responsibilities’, ‘mutual knowledge and understanding’, ‘collaborative attitude and respect’, ‘communication’ and ‘leadership’. In every theme we specified components of knowledge, skills and attitudes as found in the reviewed literature. The results show that doctors play an important role, not only in the way they collaborate in individual patient care, but also in how they help shaping organisational preconditions for collaboration.

Conclusions

This review provides an integrative view on competencies necessary for collaborative practice at the primary-secondary care interface. They are part of several domains, showing the complexity of collaboration. The information gathered in this review can support doctors to enhance and learn collaboration in daily practice and can be used in educational programmes in all stages of medical education.

General practitioners' perspectives on barriers to depression care: development and validation of a questionnaire

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) regularly feel challenged by the care of depressed patients and may encounter several barriers in providing best management. GPs' perspectives on barriers to depression care are a subject of growing interest but there is a lack of validated assessment tools. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire assessing barriers to depression care (BDC-Q) encountered by GPs in France and the French-speaking part of Switzerland.

METHODS

The BDC-Q was constructed in five steps: Item development, content validation, pretesting, testing phase and test-retest reliability. The questionnaire items were generated through a literature search. An expert panel of GPs (n = 16) and psychiatrists (n = 3) validated the content and 20 GPs pretested the questionnaire to provide response process validity evidence. We then tested the questionnaire among 116 GPs and used principal component analysis and internal consistency testing (Cronbach's alpha) to structure it into consistent dimensions. Test-retest reliability using Pearson correlation coefficient was assessed with 30 GPs who completed the questionnaire twice after an interval of at least 2 weeks.

RESULTS

The 25 items BDC-Q was structured in five dimensions: (i) provision of care by the general practitioner, (ii) considering patients' attitudes towards depression, (iii) guidance for care, (iv) collaboration with mental health specialists and (v) access to mental health care.

CONCLUSIONS

The BDC-Q displays evidence of validity and reliability to meaningfully assess GPs' perspectives on barriers to depression care. It can be used both at a practice level within a quality improvement strategy, and at a broader level, to inform health planners and tailor appropriate strategies to improve depression care in the community.

Health system constraints in integrating mental health services into primary healthcare in rural Uganda: perspectives of primary care providers

Background

The World Health Organization issued recommendations to guide the process of integrating mental health services into primary healthcare. However, there has been general as well as context specific shortcomings in the implementation of these recommendations. In Uganda, mental health services are intended to be decentralized and integrated into general healthcare, but, the services are still underutilized especially in rural areas.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to explore the health systems constraints to the integration of mental health services into PHC in Uganda from the perspective of primary health care providers (PHCPs).

Methods

This was a cross sectional qualitative study guided by the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence (SURE) framework. We used a semi-structured interview guide to gain insight into the health systems constraints faced by PHCPs in integrating mental health services into PHC.

Results

Key health systems constraints to integrating mental health services into PHC identified included inadequate practical experience during training, patient flow processes, facilities, human resources, gender related factors and challenges with accessibility of care.

Conclusion

There is need to strengthen the training of healthcare providers as well as improving the health care system that supports health workers. This would include periodic mental healthcare in-service training for PHCPs; the provision of adequate processes for outreach, and receiving, referring and transferring patients with mental health problems; empowering PHCPs at all levels to manage and treat mental health problems and adequately provide the necessary medical supplies; and increase the distribution of health workers across the health facilities to address the issue of high workload and compromised quality of care provided.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13033-019-0272-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The objective of the review was to synthesize evidence of barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into PHC from existing literature. The structure of the review was guided by the SPIDER framework which involves the following: Sample or population of interest-primary care providers (PCPs); Phenomenon of Interest-integration of mental health services into primary health care (PHC); Design-influenced robustness and analysis of the study; Evaluation-outcomes included subjective outcomes (views and attitudes); and Research type-qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies.

METHODS

Studies that described mental health integration in PHC settings, involved primary care providers, and presented barriers/facilitators of mental health integration into PHC were included in the review. The sources of information included PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, the WHO website, and OpenGrey. Assessment of bias and quality was done using two separate tools: the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) qualitative checklist and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 3353 search results. The most frequently reported barriers to integration of mental health services into PHC were (i) attitudes regarding program acceptability, appropriateness, and credibility; (ii) knowledge and skills; (iii) motivation to change; (iv) management and/or leadership; and (v) financial resources. In order to come up with an actionable approach to addressing the barriers, these factors were further analyzed along a behavior change theory.

DISCUSSION

We have shown that the integration of mental health services into PHC has been carried out by various countries. The analysis from this review provides evidence to inform policy on the existing barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the mental health integration policy option. Not all databases may have been exhausted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2016 (Registration Number: CRD42016052000 ) and published in BMC Systematic Reviews August 2017.

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary healthcare: a qualitative study among Ugandan primary care providers using the COM-B framework

Background

Uptake of clinical guideline recommendations into routine practice requires changes in attitudes and behaviors of the health care providers. The World Health Organization (WHO) has heavily invested in public health and health promotion globally by developing policy recommendations to guide clinical practice; however, clinical guidelines are often not applied. The success of the implementation of any guidelines depends on consideration of existing barriers and adequately addressing them. Therefore, exploring the context specific barriers and facilitators affecting the primary care providers (PCPs) in Mbarara district, Uganda may provide a practical way of addressing the identified barriers thus influence the PCPs action towards integration of mental healthcare services into PHC.

Methods

We adopted a theoretical model of behavior change; Capability, Opportunity and Motivation developed to understand behavior (COM-B). This was a cross-sectional study which involved using a semi-structured qualitative interview guide to conduct in-depth interviews with PCP’s (clinical officers, nurses and midwives).

Results

Capability - inadequacy in knowledge about mental disorders; more comfortable managing patients with a mental problem diagnosis than making a new one; knowledge about mental health was gained during pre-service training; no senior cadre to consultations in mental health; and burdensome to consult the Uganda Clinical Guidelines (UCG). Opportunity - limited supply of hard copies of the UCG; guidelines not practical for local setting; did not regularly deal with clients having mental illness to foster routine usage of the UCG; no sensitization about the UCG to the intended users; and no cues at the health centers to remind the PCPs to use UCG. Motivation - did not feel self-reliant; not seen the UCG at their health facilities; lack of trained mental health specialists; conflicting priorities; and no regulatory measures to encourage screening for mental health.

Conclusions

Efforts to achieve successful integration of mental health services into PHC need to fit in the context of the implementers; thus the need to adapt the UCG into local context, have cues to enforce implementation, and optimize the available expertize (mental healthcare providers) in the process.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3684-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Enhancing implementation of measurement-based mental health care in primary care: a mixed-methods randomized effectiveness evaluation of implementation facilitation

BACKGROUND

Mental health care lags behind other forms of medical care in its reliance on subjective clinician assessment. Although routine use of standardized patient-reported outcome measures, measurement-based care (MBC), can improve patient outcomes and engagement, clinician efficiency, and, collaboration across care team members, full implementation of this complex practice change can be challenging. This study seeks to understand whether and how an intensive facilitation strategy can be effective in supporting the implementation of MBC. Implementation researchers partnering with US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) leaders are conducting the study within the context of a national initiative to support MBC implementation throughout VA mental health services. This study will focus specifically on VA Primary Care-Mental Health Integration (PCMHI) programs.

METHODS

A mixed-methods, multiple case study design will include 12 PCMHI sites recruited from the 23 PCMHI programs that volunteered to participate in the VA national initiative. Guided by a study partnership panel, sites are clustered into similar groups using administrative metrics. Site pairs are recruited from within these groups. Within pairs, sites are randomized to the implementation facilitation strategy (external facilitation plus QI team) or standard VA national support. The implementation strategy provides an external facilitator and MBC experts who work with intervention sites to form a QI team, develop an implementation plan, and, identify and overcome barriers to implementation. The RE-AIM framework guides the evaluation of the implementation facilitation strategy which will utilize data from administrative, medical record, and primary qualitative and quantitative sources. Guided by the iPARIHS framework and using a mixed methods approach, we will also examine factors associated with implementation success. Finally, we will explore whether implementation of MBC increases primary care team communication and function related to the care of mental health conditions.

DISCUSSION

MBC has significant potential to improve mental health care but it represents a major change in practice. Understanding factors that can support MBC implementation is essential to attaining its potential benefits and spreading these benefits across the health care system.

Acting on audit & feedback: a qualitative instrumental case study in mental health services in Norway

BACKGROUND

The National Guideline for Assessment, Treatment and Social Rehabilitation of Persons with Concurrent Substance Use and Mental Health Disorders, launched in 2012, is to be implemented in mental health services in Norway. Audit and feedback (A&F) is commonly used as the starting point of an implementation process. It aims to measure the research-practice gap, but its effect varies greatly. Less is known of how audit and feedback is used in natural settings. The aim of this study was to describe and investigate what is discussed and thematised when Quality Improvement (QI) teams in a District Psychiatric Centre (DPC) work to complete an action form as part of an A&F cycle in 2014.

METHODS

This was an instrumental multiple case study involving four units in a DPC in Norway. We used open non-participant observation of QI team meetings in their natural setting, a total of seven teams and eleven meetings.

RESULTS

The discussions provided health professionals with insight into their own and their colleagues' practices. They revealed insufficient knowledge of substance-related disorders and experienced unclear role expectations. We found differences in how professional groups sought answers to questions of clinical practice and that they were concerned about whether new tasks fitted in with their routine ways of working.

CONCLUSION

Acting on A&F provided an opportunity to discuss practice in general, enhancing awareness of good practice. There was a general need for arenas to relate to practice and QI team meetings after A&F may well be a suitable arena for this. Self-assessment audits seem valuable, particular in areas where no benchmarked data exists, and there is a demand for implementation of new guidelines that might change routines and develop new roles. QI teams could benefit from having a unit leader present at meetings. Nurses and social educators and others turn to psychiatrists or psychologists for answers to clinical and organisational questions beyond guidelines, and show less confidence or routine in seeking research-based information. There is a general need to emphasise training in evidence-based practice and information seeking behaviour for all professional groups.

"Conversational Advice": A mixed-methods analysis of medical residents' experiences co-managing primary care patients with behavioral health providers

OBJECTIVE

When integrated behavioral health clinicians (IBHCs) and residents co-manage patients, residents may learn new approaches. We aimed to understand the effect of co-management on residents' behavioral health (BH) management learning.

METHODS

Residents completed a web-based survey enquiring: whether co-management included a shared visit and/or face-to-face meeting with an IBHC, whether residents received feedback from the IBHC, and what they learned. Qualitative responses were coded thematically using a constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Among 117 respondents (overall response rate 72%, 117/163), from five residencies recruited from 40 residencies with BH integration, residents were significantly more likely to receive feedback if they had a shared visit with the patient and an IBHC (yes 69% vs. no 33%; adjusted OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.6). Residents reported three major learning themes: interpersonal communication skills awareness, BH skills awareness, and newly adopted attitudes toward BH. Residents who received feedback were more likely to report themes of interpersonal communication skills awareness (yes 26.6% vs. no 9.4%).

CONCLUSION

BH integration promotes increased feedback for residents practicing face-to-face co-management with IBHCs, and a positive influence regarding residents' attitudes and perceived skills.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Residency programs can meaningfully improve residents' learning by promoting face-to-face co-management with IBHCs.

Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services: a scoping review of interventions at the primary-secondary care interface

Objectives Variation in patterns of referral from primary care can lead to inappropriate overuse or underuse of specialist resources. Our aim was to review the literature on strategies involving primary care that are designed to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services. Methods A scoping review to update a review published in 2006. We conducted a systematic literature search and qualitative evidence synthesis of studies across five intervention domains: transfer of services from hospital to primary care; relocation of hospital services to primary care; joint working between primary care practitioners and specialists; interventions to change the referral behaviour of primary care practitioners and interventions to change patient behaviour. Results The 183 studies published since 2005, taken with the findings of the previous review, suggest that transfer of services from secondary to primary care and strategies aimed at changing referral behaviour of primary care clinicians can be effective in reducing outpatient referrals and in increasing the appropriateness of referrals. Availability of specialist advice to primary care practitioners by email or phone and use of store-and-forward telemedicine also show potential for reducing outpatient referrals and hence reducing costs. There was little evidence of a beneficial effect of relocation of specialists to primary care, or joint primary/secondary care management of patients on outpatient referrals. Across all intervention categories there was little evidence available on cost-effectiveness. Conclusions There are a number of promising interventions which may improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services, including making it easier for primary care clinicians and specialists to discuss patients by email or phone. There remain substantial gaps in the evidence, particularly on cost-effectiveness, and new interventions should continue to be evaluated as they are implemented more widely. A move for specialists to work in the community is unlikely to be cost-effective without enhancing primary care clinicians' skills through education or joint consultations with complex patients.

Outpatient services and primary care: scoping review, substudies and international comparisons

Aim

This study updates a previous scoping review published by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in 2006 (Roland M, McDonald R, Sibbald B.Outpatient Services and Primary Care: A Scoping Review of Research Into Strategies For Improving Outpatient Effectiveness and Efficiency. Southampton: NIHR Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre; 2006) and focuses on strategies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of outpatient services.

Findings from the scoping review

Evidence from the scoping review suggests that, with appropriate safeguards, training and support, substantial parts of care given in outpatient clinics can be transferred to primary care. This includes additional evidence since our 2006 review which supports general practitioner (GP) follow-up as an alternative to outpatient follow-up appointments, primary medical care of chronic conditions and minor surgery in primary care. Relocating specialists to primary care settings is popular with patients, and increased joint working between specialists and GPs, as suggested in the NHS Five Year Forward View, can be of substantial educational value. However, for these approaches there is very limited information on cost-effectiveness; we do not know whether they increase or reduce overall demand and whether the new models cost more or less than traditional approaches. One promising development is the increasing use of e-mail between GPs and specialists, with some studies suggesting that better communication (including the transmission of results and images) could substantially reduce the need for some referrals.

Findings from the substudies

Because of the limited literature on some areas, we conducted a number of substudies in England. The first was of referral management centres, which have been established to triage and, potentially, divert referrals away from hospitals. These centres encounter practical and administrative challenges and have difficulty getting buy-in from local clinicians. Their effectiveness is uncertain, as is the effect of schemes which provide systematic review of referrals within GP practices. However, the latter appear to have more positive educational value, as shown in our second substudy. We also studied consultants who held contracts with community-based organisations rather than with hospital trusts. Although these posts offer opportunities in terms of breaking down artificial and unhelpful primary–secondary care barriers, they may be constrained by their idiosyncratic nature, a lack of clarity around roles, challenges to professional identity and a lack of opportunities for professional development. Finally, we examined the work done by other countries to reform activity at the primary–secondary care interface. Common approaches included the use of financial mechanisms and incentives, the transfer of work to primary care, the relocation of specialists and the use of guidelines and protocols. With the possible exception of financial incentives, the lack of robust evidence on the effect of these approaches and the contexts in which they were introduced limits the lessons that can be drawn for the English NHS.

Conclusions

For many conditions, high-quality care in the community can be provided and is popular with patients. There is little conclusive evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the provision of more care in the community. In developing new models of care for the NHS, it should not be assumed that community-based care will be cheaper than conventional hospital-based care. Possible reasons care in the community may be more expensive include supply-induced demand and addressing unmet need through new forms of care and through loss of efficiency gained from concentrating services in hospitals. Evidence from this study suggests that further shifts of care into the community can be justified only if (a) high value is given to patient convenience in relation to NHS costs or (b) community care can be provided in a way that reduces overall health-care costs. However, reconfigurations of services are often introduced without adequate evaluation and it is important that new NHS initiatives should collect data to show whether or not they have added value, and improved quality and patient and staff experience.

Funding

The NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Collaborating in the context of co-location: a grounded theory study

BACKGROUND

Most individuals with mental health concerns seek care from their primary care provider, who may lack comfort, knowledge, and time to provide care. Interprofessional collaboration between providers improves access to primary mental health services and increases primary care providers' comfort offering these services. Building and sustaining interprofessional relationships is foundational to collaborative practice in primary care settings. However, little is known about the relationship building process within these collaborative relationships. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to gain a theoretical understanding of the interprofessional collaborative relationship-building process to guide health care providers and leaders as they integrate mental health services into primary care settings.

METHODS

Forty primary and mental health care providers completed a demographic questionnaire and participated in either an individual or group interview. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were reviewed several times and then individually coded. Codes were reviewed and similar codes were collapsed to form categories using using constant comparison. All codes and categories were discussed amongst the researchers and the final categories and core category was agreed upon using constant comparison and consensus.

RESULTS

A four-stage developmental interprofessional collaborative relationship-building model explained the emergent core category of Collaboration in the Context of Co-location. The four stages included 1) Looking for Help, 2) Initiating Co-location, 3) Fitting-in, and 4) Growing Reciprocity. A patient-focus and communication strategies were essential processes throughout the interprofessional collaborative relationship-building process.

CONCLUSIONS

Building interprofessional collaborative relationships amongst health care providers are essential to delivering mental health services in primary care settings. This developmental model describes the process of how these relationships are co-created and supported by the health care region. Furthermore, the model emphasizes that all providers must develop and sustain a patient-focus and communication strategies that are flexible. Applying this model, health care providers can guide the creation and sustainability of primary care interprofessional collaborative relationships. Moreover, this model may guide health care leaders and policy makers as they initiate interprofessional collaborative practice in other health care settings.

The anatomy of primary care and mental health clinician communication: a quality improvement case study

BACKGROUND

The high prevalence of comorbid physical and mental illnesses among veterans is well known. Therefore, ensuring effective communication between primary care (PC) and mental health (MH) clinicians in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system is essential. The VA's Patient Aligned Care Teams (PACT) initiative has further raised awareness of the need for communication between PC and MH. Improving such communication, however, has proven challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To qualitatively understand barriers to PC-MH communication in an academic community-based clinic by using continuous quality improvement (CQI) tools and then initiate a change strategy.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND APPROACH

An interdisciplinary quality improvement (QI) work group composed of 11 on-site PC and MH providers, administrators, and researchers identified communication barriers and facilitators using fishbone diagrams and process flow maps. The work group then verified and provided context for the diagram and flow maps through medical record review (32 patients who received both PC and MH care), interviews (6 stakeholders), and reports from four previously completed focus groups. Based on these findings and a previous systematic review of interventions to improve interspecialty communication, the team initiated plans for improvement.

KEY RESULTS

Key communication barriers included lack of effective standardized communication processes, practice style differences, and inadequate PC training in MH. Clinicians often accessed advice or formal consultation based on pre-existing across-discipline personal relationships. The work group identified collocated collaborative care, joint care planning, and joint case conferences as feasible, evidence-based interventions for improving communication.

CONCLUSIONS

CQI tools enabled providers to systematically assess local communication barriers and facilitators and engaged stakeholders in developing possible solutions. A locally tailored CQI process focusing on communication helped initiate change strategies and ongoing improvement efforts.

Predictors of primary care management of depression in the Veterans Affairs healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) vary in skills to effectively treat depression. Key features of evidence-based collaborative care models (CCMs) include the availability of depression care managers (DCMs) and mental health specialists (MHSs) in primary care. Little is known, however, about the relationships between PCP characteristics, CCM features, and PCP depression care.

OBJECTIVE

To assess relationships between various CCM features, PCP characteristics, and PCP depression management.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of a provider survey.

PARTICIPANTS

180 PCPs in eight VA sites nationwide.

MAIN MEASURES

Independent variables included scales measuring comfort and difficulty with depression care; collaboration with a MHS; self-reported depression caseload; availability of a collocated MHS, and co-management with a DCM or MHS. Covariates included provider type and gender. For outcomes, we assessed PCP self-reported performance of key depression management behaviors in primary care in the past 6 months.

KEY RESULTS

Response rate was 52 % overall, with 47 % attending physicians, 34 % residents, and 19 % nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Half (52 %) reported greater than eight veterans with depression in their panels and a MHS collocated in primary care (50 %). Seven of the eight clinics had a DCM. In multivariable analysis, significant predictors for PCP depression management included comfort, difficulty, co-management with MHSs and numbers of veterans with depression in their panels.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs who felt greater ease and comfort in managing depression, co-managed with MHSs, and reported higher depression caseloads, were more likely to report performing depression management behaviors. Neither a collocated MHS, collaborating with a MHS, nor co-managing with a DCM independently predicted PCP depression management. Because the success of collaborative care for depression depends on the ability and willingness of PCPs to engage in managing depression themselves, along with other providers, more research is necessary to understand how to engage PCPs in depression management.

Health care providers' perspectives of medication adherence in the treatment of depression: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Non-adherence to antidepressant medications is a significant barrier to the successful treatment of depression. The purpose of this study was to explore the perspectives of health care providers on antidepressant medication non-adherence in clinical practice.

METHODS

Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 31 health care providers from a range of disciplines and settings in the state of New South Wales, Australia. Interviews focused on medication adherence issues in depression and participants' strategies in addressing them. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically content analyzed using a constant comparison approach.

RESULTS

Participants acknowledged medication non-adherence to be a complex problem in depression, and attributed this problem to patient, medication and environmental-specific issues. Five approaches in addressing non-adherence were reported: patient education, building partnerships with patients, pharmacological management, developing behavioural skills and building supportive networks. Challenges to the management of non-adherence were lack of time and skills, assessment of medication adherence, transition period immediately post-discharge and conflicts in views between providers.

CONCLUSION

Participants were able to identify issues and strategies in addressing antidepressant non-adherence; however, barriers were also identified that could impact on providers' ability to address this issue effectively. More research is needed to develop effective multidisciplinary strategies that take into account providers' perspectives in improving adherence to antidepressant medications.

Experiences of social workers in primary care in Ireland

This article presents the findings of research conducted with social workers in primary health care teams in Ireland. Data from questionnaires and from a focus group were analyzed. The findings draw attention to the nature of the role of the primary care social worker, including both the satisfying and challenging aspects of this role. It was evident that the participants liked the generic nature of their role and the fact that they worked with non-mandated clients. However, they encountered challenges related to resources, management structures, and interdisciplinary work. The findings shed light on an area of social work that has been under-researched.

Shared care in mental illness: A rapid review to inform implementation

BACKGROUND

While integrated primary healthcare for the management of depression has been well researched, appropriate models of primary care for people with severe and persistent psychotic disorders are poorly understood. In 2010 the NSW (Australia) Health Department commissioned a review of the evidence on "shared care" models of ambulatory mental health services. This focussed on critical factors in the implementation of these models in clinical practice, with a view to providing policy direction. The review excluded evidence about dementia, substance use and personality disorders.

METHODS

A rapid review involving a search for systematic reviews on The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). This was followed by a search for papers published since these systematic reviews on Medline and supplemented by limited iterative searching from reference lists.

RESULTS

Shared care trials report improved mental and physical health outcomes in some clinical settings with improved social function, self management skills, service acceptability and reduced hospitalisation. Other benefits include improved access to specialist care, better engagement with and acceptability of mental health services. Limited economic evaluation shows significant set up costs, reduced patient costs and service savings often realised by other providers. Nevertheless these findings are not evident across all clinical groups. Gains require substantial cross-organisational commitment, carefully designed and consistently delivered interventions, with attention to staff selection, training and supervision. Effective models incorporated linkages across various service levels, clinical monitoring within agreed treatment protocols, improved continuity and comprehensiveness of services.

CONCLUSIONS

"Shared Care" models of mental health service delivery require attention to multiple levels (from organisational to individual clinicians), and complex service re-design. Re-evaluation of the roles of specialist mental health staff is a critical requirement. As expected, no one model of "shared" care fits diverse clinical groups. On the basis of the available evidence, we recommended a local trial that examined the process of implementation of core principles of shared care within primary care and specialist mental health clinical services.

The Western Norway mental health interface study: a controlled intervention trial on referral letters between primary care and specialist mental health care

BACKGROUND

Referral letters are the main communication means between Primary and Specialised Mental Health Care. However, studies of referral letters reveal that they lack important information, and how this lack of information affects the care for patients is unknown. This study aims to explore if and to what degree the quality of referral letters within Mental Health Care for adults can be improved and the potential improvement's impact on defined patient, professional and organisational related outcomes.

METHODS AND DESIGN

A controlled study with pre and post test will be prepared and accomplished to explore the correlation between the content of referral letters and outcomes of the care for the referred patients. The study is performed in accordance with the guideline of the Medical Research Council on development and evaluation of complex interventions. Using a mixed method design, a stepwise model will be conducted: Firstly, process and outcome measures will be developed and tested. Secondly, by these measures, the results from an intervention group of General Practitioners (GPs) who receive a complex quality improvement intervention will be compared with results from a control group who perform "care as usual". Compliance to the introduced guideline will be measured as a mediator.

DISCUSSION

The Western Norway Mental Health Interface Study is among the first trials to evaluate the impact of the quality of referral letters on the organization of care. This study will provide information that will be usable for healthcare managers and clinicians in both Primary and Specialised Care settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01374035.

Implementing collaborative care for depression treatment in primary care: a cluster randomized evaluation of a quality improvement practice redesign

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses show collaborative care models (CCMs) with nurse care management are effective for improving primary care for depression. This study aimed to develop CCM approaches that could be sustained and spread within Veterans Affairs (VA). Evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) uses QI approaches within a research/clinical partnership to redesign care. The study used EBQI methods for CCM redesign, tested the effectiveness of the locally adapted model as implemented, and assessed the contextual factors shaping intervention effectiveness.

METHODS

The study intervention is EBQI as applied to CCM implementation. The study uses a cluster randomized design as a formative evaluation tool to test and improve the effectiveness of the redesign process, with seven intervention and three non-intervention VA primary care practices in five different states. The primary study outcome is patient antidepressant use. The context evaluation is descriptive and uses subgroup analysis. The primary context evaluation measure is naturalistic primary care clinician (PCC) predilection to adopt CCM.For the randomized evaluation, trained telephone research interviewers enrolled consecutive primary care patients with major depression in the evaluation, referred enrolled patients in intervention practices to the implemented CCM, and re-surveyed at seven months.

RESULTS

Interviewers enrolled 288 CCM site and 258 non-CCM site patients. Enrolled intervention site patients were more likely to receive appropriate antidepressant care (66% versus 43%, p = 0.01), but showed no significant difference in symptom improvement compared to usual care. In terms of context, only 40% of enrolled patients received complete care management per protocol. PCC predilection to adopt CCM had substantial effects on patient participation, with patients belonging to early adopter clinicians completing adequate care manager follow-up significantly more often than patients of clinicians with low predilection to adopt CCM (74% versus 48%%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Depression CCM designed and implemented by primary care practices using EBQI improved antidepressant initiation. Combining QI methods with a randomized evaluation proved challenging, but enabled new insights into the process of translating research-based CCM into practice. Future research on the effects of PCC attitudes and skills on CCM results, as well as on enhancing the link between improved antidepressant use and symptom outcomes, is needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00105820.

Building effective service linkages in primary mental health care: a narrative review part 2

BACKGROUND

Primary care services have not generally been effective in meeting mental health care needs. There is evidence that collaboration between primary care and specialist mental health services can improve clinical and organisational outcomes. It is not clear however what factors enable or hinder effective collaboration. The objective of this study was to examine the factors that enable effective collaboration between specialist mental health services and primary mental health care.

METHODS

A narrative and thematic review of English language papers published between 1998 and 2009. An expert reference group helped formulate strategies for policy makers. Studies of descriptive and qualitative design from Australia, New Zealand, UK, Europe, USA and Canada were included. Data were extracted on factors reported as enablers or barriers to development of service linkages. These were tabulated by theme at clinical and organisational levels and the inter-relationship between themes was explored.

RESULTS

A thematic analysis of 30 papers found the most frequently cited group of factors was "partnership formation", specifically role clarity between health care workers. Other factor groups supporting clinical partnership formation were staff support, clinician attributes, clinic physical features and evaluation and feedback. At the organisational level a supportive institutional environment of leadership and change management was important. The expert reference group then proposed strategies for collaboration that would be seen as important, acceptable and feasible. Because of the variability of study types we did not exclude on quality and findings are weighted by the number of studies. Variability in local service contexts limits the generalisation of findings.

CONCLUSION

The findings provide a framework for health planners to develop effective service linkages in primary mental health care. Our expert reference group proposed five areas of strategy for policy makers that address organisational level support, joint clinical problem solving, local joint care guidelines, staff training and supervision and feedback.

Clinic-level process of care for depression in primary care settings

Multi-component models for improving depression care target primary care (PC) clinics, yet few studies document usual clinic-level care. This case comparison assessed usual processes for depression management at 10 PC clinics. Although general similarities existed across sites, clinics varied on specific processes, barriers, and adherence to practice guidelines. Screening for depression conformed to guidelines. Processes for assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up varied to different degrees in different clinics. This individuality of usual care should be defined prior to quality improvement interventions, and may provide insights for introducing or tailoring changes, as well as improving interpretation of evaluation results.

Integrating Mental Health and Primary Care

Mental health and primary care delivery systems have evolved to operate differently. For example, attention to multiple medical issues, health maintenance, and structured diagnostic procedures are standard elements of primary care rarely incorporated into mental health care. A multidisciplinary treatment approach, group care, and case management are common features of mental health treatment settings only rarely used in primary care practices. Advances in treatments for mental health disorders and increased knowledge of the integral link between mental health and physical health encourage mental health disorder treatment in primary care settings, which reach the most patients. Effective integration of mental health care into primary care requires systematic and pragmatic change that builds on the strengths of both mental health and primary care.