Tracking activities and adaptations in a multi-site stepped wedge pragmatic trial of a cancer symptom management intervention

Background

Pragmatic trials may need to adapt interventions to enhance local fit, and adaptation tracking is critical to evaluation. This study describes the tracking approach for a multisite, stepped-wedge hybrid pragmatic trial testing implementation and effectiveness of a cancer symptom management intervention.

Methods

Study activities were documented in a spreadsheet by date and category. Intervention adaptations were tracked across multiple workgroups in a database structured around the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Expanded (FRAME) domains, e.g., reasons for change. Implementation strategies were tracked longitudinally and by cluster in a database using the Longitudinal Implementation Strategy Tracking System (LISTS) method. A logic model was created at the end of the study to describe core intervention components and implementation strategies with dates of adaptations.

Results

Between January 2019 and January 2023, 187 study activities were documented. Most intervention activities took place early, but there were important intervention refinements during the course of the trial, including the expansion of interventionist roles to add two new disciplines. Eleven intervention adaptations were documented. Most were unplanned and aimed at improving fit or increasing engagement. Thirty-three implementation strategies were documented, the largest number of which were related to educating stakeholders. Most (but not all) component and strategy additions were consistent with the mechanisms of change as hypothesized at trial launch.

Conclusions

A multifaceted approach to adaptation tracking, combined with a logic model, supported identification of meaningful changes for use in evaluation, but further work is needed to minimize burden and ensure robust and practical systems that inform both evaluation and timely decision-making.

Trial

Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03892967. Registered on March 25, 2019. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.

Medicaid Costs and Utilization of Collaborative Versus Colocation Care for Patients With Depression

OBJECTIVE

The authors examined cost and utilization metrics for racially diverse Medicaid primary care patients with depression receiving care through either a collaborative care model (CoCM) of integration or the standard colocation model.

METHODS

Data from a retrospective cohort of Medicaid patients screening positive for clinically significant depression during January 2016-December 2017 were analyzed to assess health care costs and selected utilization measures. Seven primary care clinics providing CoCM were compared with 16 clinics providing colocated behavioral health care. Data for the first year and second year after a patient received an initial Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score ≥10 were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the first year, compared with patients receiving colocated care (N=3,061), CoCM patients (N=4,315) had significantly lower odds of emergency department (ED) visits (OR=0.95) and medical specialty office visits (OR=0.92), with slightly higher odds of primary care provider (PCP) visits (OR=1.03) and behavioral health office visits (OR=1.03). In year 2, CoCM patients (N=2,623) had significantly lower odds of inpatient medical admissions (OR=0.87), ED visits (OR=0.84), medical specialty office visits (OR=0.89), and PCP visits (OR=0.94) than the colocated care patients (N=1,838). The two groups did not significantly differ in total cost in both years.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to CoCM treatment in primary care for racially diverse Medicaid patients with depression was associated with more positive health care utilization outcomes than for those accessing colocated treatment. As organizations continue to seek opportunities to integrate behavioral health care into primary care, consideration of health care costs and utilization may be helpful in the selection and implementation of integration models.

Making It to Sustainability: Evaluating Billing Strategies for Collaborative Care

The collaborative care model (CoCM) is an effective strategy to manage common mental disorders in primary care. Despite the growing adoption of newer CoCM billing codes to support these programs, few studies have investigated the use of these codes. This column evaluated the implementation of CoCM billing codes by comparing clinics using different billing strategies and assessed the impact of CoCM code implementation on revenue and on clinical and process-of-care outcomes. Qualitative data were obtained to understand provider perspectives. The results indicate that CoCM billing code implementation is operationally feasible, does not adversely affect the delivery of patient care or revenue, and is acceptable to providers.

Implementation of an Adapted Collaborative Care Model

Kosrae is an island state in the Federated States of Micronesia, a low- to middle-income country. Kosrae Community Health Center, an independent nonprofit organization, partnered with the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Hawai'i to integrate behavioral health services by using the collaborative care model (CoCM). The partnership encountered logistic and cultural challenges, but regular communication, case reviews, and training sessions enabled successful CoCM implementation. This success indicates that CoCM can be adapted in a remote island nation with finite resources. Findings indicate that planning for a longer implementation period may be required for international collaborations with limited previous experience in behavioral health.

Collaborative care compared to enhanced standard treatment of depression with co-morbid medical conditions among patients from rural South India: a cluster randomized controlled trial (HOPE Study)

BACKGROUND

Depression is common among primary care patients in LMIC but treatments are largely ineffective. In this cluster-randomized controlled trial, we tested whether depression outcomes are different among recipients of a collaborative care model compared to enhanced standard treatment in patients with co-morbid chronic medical conditions.

METHODS

We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial among participants 30 years or older seeking care at 49 primary health centers (PHCs) in rural Karnataka, diagnosed with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, generalized anxiety disorder, or panic disorder on the MINI-International Neuropsychiatric Interview plus either hypertension, diabetes, or ischemic heart disease. From a list of all PHCs in the district, 24 PHCs were randomized a priori to deliver collaborative care and 25 PHCs enhanced standard treatment. The collaborative care model consisted of a clinic-based and a community-based component. Study assessment staff was blinded to treatment arm allocation. The primary outcome was the individual-level PHQ-9 score over time.

RESULTS

Between May 2015 and Nov 2018, 2486 participants were enrolled, 1264 in the control arm, and 1222 in the intervention arm. They were assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. The mean PHQ-9 depression score was around 8.5 at baseline. At each follow-up PHQ-9 scores were significantly lower in the intervention (5.24, 4.81 and 4.22 at respective follow-ups) than in the control group (6.69, 6.13, 5.23, respectively). A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p < 0.001) in a multi-level model over all waves, nested within individuals who were nested within PHCs, confirmed that the decrease in depression score from baseline was larger for collaborative care than enhanced standard care throughout follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The collaborative care intervention resulted in significantly lower depression scores compared to enhanced standard care among participants with co-morbid physical conditions. The findings have potential implications for integrating mental health and chronic disease treatment in resource constrained settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02310932 , registered on December 8, 2014, and Clinical Trials Registry India CTRI/2018/04/013001 , registered on April 4, 2018. Retrospectively registered.

Care team and practice-level implementation strategies to optimize pediatric collaborative care: study protocol for a cluster-randomized hybrid type III trial

BACKGROUND

Implementation facilitation is an effective strategy to support the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs), but our understanding of multilevel strategies and the mechanisms of change within the "black box" of implementation facilitation is limited. This implementation trial seeks to disentangle and evaluate the effects of facilitation strategies that separately target the care team and leadership levels on implementation of a collaborative care model in pediatric primary care. Strategies targeting the provider care team (TEAM) should engage team-level mechanisms, and strategies targeting leaders (LEAD) should engage organizational mechanisms.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial in a 2 × 2 factorial design to evaluate the main and interactive effects of TEAM and LEAD and test for mediation and moderation of effects. Twenty-four pediatric primary care practices will receive standard REP training to implement Doctor-Office Collaborative Care (DOCC) and then be randomized to (1) Standard REP only, (2) TEAM, (3) LEAD, or (4) TEAM + LEAD. Implementation outcomes are DOCC service delivery and change in practice-level care management competencies. Clinical outcomes are child symptom severity and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

This statewide trial is one of the first to test the unique and synergistic effects of implementation strategies targeting care teams and practice leadership. It will advance our knowledge of effective care team and practice-level implementation strategies and mechanisms of change. Findings will support efforts to improve common child behavioral health conditions by optimizing scale-up and sustainment of CCMs in a pediatric patient-centered medical home.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04946253 . Registered June 30, 2021.

Impact of socioeconomic status on depression clinical outcomes at six months in a Midwestern, United States community

INTRODUCTION

Lower socioeconomic status (SES) has been associated with poor healthcare outcomes in depression. However, reliable individual-level SES data rarely exists for clinical research. The HOUSES index relies on publicly available data allowing for evaluation of individual-level SES on patient outcomes.

HYPOTHESIS

Primary care patients with depression within the lower SES quartile (Quartile 1 vs. Quartile 4, of the HOUSES index) would experience worse clinical outcomes of their symptoms six months after diagnosis.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study which followed 4313 adult primary care patients that were diagnosed with depression during the study period of 2008-2015. The outcome measures were the six month PHQ-9 scores.

RESULTS

At six months, a higher HOUSES quartile was associated with greater odds of remission of depressive symptoms (RDS) and lower odds of persistent depressive symptoms (PDS), after controlling for covariates. Patients in Quartile 4 had 27% more likelihood of RDS and a 24% lower likelihood of PDS at six months compared to a Quartile 1 patient.

LIMITATIONS

As a retrospective study only can observe associations but not causation. Only one institution participated and not all treatments were readily available, limiting the generalizability of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower SES as demonstrated by a lower HOUSES quartile (Quartile 1 versus 4) was associated with lower odds of RDS and increased odds of PDS at six months. HOUSES index is a useful tool for identifying patients at risk for worse clinical outcomes and may help health care systems plan resource allocation for depression care.

Provision of Collaborative Care Model and General Behavioral Health Integration Services in Medicare

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to describe the early use of collaborative care model (CoCM) and general behavioral health integration (BHI) billing codes among clinicians.

METHODS

Counts and payments were calculated for accepted and denied claims for CoCM and general BHI services delivered to Medicare beneficiaries nationwide in 2017-2018. Payment and utilization data were stratified by clinical specialty and site of service.

RESULTS

Overall, 10,294 CoCM and general BHI services were delivered in 2017, totaling $626,292 in payments, and 81,433 CoCM and general BHI services were delivered in 2018, totaling $7,442,985 in payments. Medicare denied 5% of services in 2017 and 32% in 2018. Most CoCM and general BHI services were delivered by primary care physicians in office-based settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of codes designed to promote BHI revealed an eightfold increase in CoCM and general BHI use between 2017 and 2018. However, denied services represent a barrier, and use among eligible beneficiaries remains low.

Depressive Symptom Trajectories Among People Living with HIV in a Collaborative Care Program

Depressive symptoms may differ in severity and change over time in people living with HIV (PLWH). Describing depression trajectories and associated clinical characteristics of PLWH in an interventional study may help in developing a more personalized medicine approach. Using latent class growth analysis four, 15-month self-reported depression trajectories were identified in 416 PLWH participating in a collaborative care program. The four subgroups were characterized by improving (58.4% [of participants]), worsening (9.4%), highly responsive (19.5%) and persistently severe (12.7%) depressive symptoms. A high proportion of individuals were in trajectories marked by improvement. Further, the highly responsive group had on average, over 50% reduction of self-reported depressive symptoms. Self-reported trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder, lower neighborhood-level education and fewer HIV and psychiatry clinic visits were associated with worsening or persistently severe depressive symptom trajectories. Members of the persistently severe group were less likely to be virally suppressed after 12-months. Identifying subgroups of PLWH based on changes in self-reported depressive symptoms may further inform intervention approaches that can advance care.

Provider views on childhood obesity management in primary care settings: a mixed methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Pediatric providers are key players in the treatment of childhood obesity, yet rates of obesity management in the primary care setting are low. The goal of this study was to examine the views of pediatric providers on conducting obesity management in the primary care setting, and identify potential resources and care models that could facilitate delivery of this care.

METHODS

A mixed methods approach was utilized. Four focus groups were conducted with providers from a large pediatric network in San Diego County. Based on a priori and emerging themes, a questionnaire was developed and administered to the larger group of providers in this network.

RESULTS

Barriers to conducting obesity management fell into four categories: provider-level/individual (e.g., lack of knowledge and confidence), practice-based/systems-level (e.g., lack of time and resources), parent-level (e.g., poor motivation and follow-up), and environmental (e.g., lack of access to resources). Solutions centered around implementing a team approach to care (with case managers and health coaches) and electronic medical record changes to include best practice guidelines, increased ease of documentation, and delivery of standardized handouts/resources. Survey results revealed only 23.8% of providers wanted to conduct behavioral management of obesity. The most requested support was the introduction of a health educator in the office to deliver a brief behavioral intervention.

CONCLUSION

While providers recognize the importance of addressing weight during a well-child visit, they do not want to conduct obesity management on their own. Future efforts to improve health outcomes for pediatric obesity should consider implementing a collaborative care approach.

The impact of open to collaborative care model in cardiovascular surgical unit

BACKGROUND

When compared with open care model, a closed one improves patient care in intensive care units (ICUs), mixed ICUs, surgical ICUs and trauma centers. We wanted to evaluate the benefit of a collaborative care model in highly specialized cardiovascular care unit.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective, observational study conducted in the cardiovascular care unit of a teaching hospital. All patients who were above 20 years old and had received cardiovascular operation were enrolled for data collection and analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 270 subjects were enrolled for analysis during the 2-year study period. In the collaborative care model, the CVSU length of stay (p = 0.001) and CVSU-free days (p = 0.0008) were significantly better than those in an open care model.

DISCUSSION

The collaborative care model improved postoperative outcome in the cardiovascular surgical unit for those needing prolonged ICU care.

Culturally relevant treatment services for perinatal depression in socio-economically disadvantaged women: the design of the MOMCare study

BACKGROUND

Depression during pregnancy has been demonstrated to be predictive of low birthweight, prematurity, and postpartum depression. These adverse outcomes potentially have lasting effects on maternal and child well-being. Socio-economically disadvantaged women are twice as likely as middle-class women to meet diagnostic criteria for antenatal major depression (MDD), but have proven difficult to engage and retain in treatment. Collaborative care treatment models for depression have not been evaluated for racially/ethnically diverse, pregnant women on Medicaid receiving care in a public health system. This paper describes the design, methodology, culturally relevant enhancements, and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of depression care management compared to public health Maternity Support Services (MSS).

METHODS

Pregnant, public health patients, >18 years with a likely diagnosis of MDD or dysthymia, measured respectively by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) or the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), were randomized to the intervention or to public health MSS. The primary outcome was reduction in depression severity from baseline during pregnancy to 18-months post-baseline (one-year postpartum).

BASELINE RESULTS

168 women with likely MDD (96.4%) and/or dysthymia (24.4%) were randomized. Average age was 27.6 years and gestational age was 22.4 weeks; 58.3% racial/ethnic minority; 71.4% unmarried; 22% no high school degree/GED; 65.3% unemployed; 42.1% making <$10,000 annually; 80.4% having recurrent depression; 64.6% PTSD, and 72% unplanned pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

A collaborative care team, including a psychiatrist, psychologist, project manager, and 3 social workers, met weekly, collaborated with the patients' obstetrics providers, and monitored depression severity using an electronic tracking system. Potential sustainability of the intervention within a public health system requires further study.

Improving depression treatment for women: integrating a collaborative care depression intervention into OB-GYN care

BACKGROUND

Women have higher rates of depression and often experience depression symptoms during critical reproductive periods, including adolescence, pregnancy, postpartum, and menopause. Collaborative care intervention models for mood disorders in patients receiving care in an OB-GYN clinic setting have not been evaluated. Study design and methodology for a randomized controlled trial of collaborative care depression management versus usual care in OB-GYN clinics and the details of the adapted collaborative care intervention and model implementation are described in this paper.

METHODS

Women over age 18 years with clinically significant symptoms of depression, as measured by a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score ≥10 and a clinical diagnosis of major depression or dysthymia, were randomized to the study intervention or to usual care and were followed for 18 months. The primary outcome assessed was change over time in the SCL-20 depression scale between baseline and 12 months.

BASELINE RESULTS

Two hundred five women were randomized: 57% white, 20% African American, 9% Asian or Pacific Islander, 7% Hispanic, and 6% Native American. Mean age was 39 years. 4.6% were pregnant and 7.5% were within 12 months postpartum. The majority were single (52%), and 95% had at least the equivalent of a high school diploma. Almost all patients met DSM IV criteria for major depression (99%) and approximately 33% met criteria for dysthymia.

CONCLUSIONS

An OB-GYN collaborative care team, including a social worker, a psychiatrist, and an OB-GYN physician, who met weekly and used an electronic tracking system for patients was the essential element of the proposed depression care treatment model described here. Further study of models that improve quality of depression care that are adapted to the unique OB-GYN setting is needed.