The impact of behavioral and mental health risk assessments on goal setting in primary care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Krist AH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4927449 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The impact of behavioral and mental health risk assessments on goal setting in primary care.
Krist Alex H AH Glasgow Russell E RE Heurtin-Roberts Suzanne S Sabo Roy T RT Roby Dylan H DH Gorin Sherri N Sheinfeld SN Balasubramanian Bijal A BA Estabrooks Paul A PA Ory Marcia G MG Glenn Beth A BA Phillips Siobhan M SM Kessler Rodger R Johnson Sallie Beth SB Rohweder Catherine L CL Fernandez Maria E ME
Translational behavioral medicine 20160601 2
Patient-centered health risk assessments (HRAs) that screen for unhealthy behaviors, prioritize concerns, and provide feedback may improve counseling, goal setting, and health. To evaluate the effectiveness of routinely administering a patient-centered HRA, My Own Health Report, for diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol, drug use, stress, depression, anxiety, and sleep, 18 primary care practices were randomized to ask patients to complete My Own Health Report (MOHR) before an office visit (interventi ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:We examine the impact of mental health based primary care on physical health treatment among community mental health center patients in New York State using propensity score adjusted difference in difference models. Outcomes are quality indicators related to outpatient medical visits, diabetes HbA1c monitoring, and metabolic monitoring of antipsychotic treatment. Results suggest the program improved metabolic monitoring for patients on antipsychotics in one of two waves, but did not impact other quality indicators. Ceiling effects may have limited program impacts. More structured clinical programs to may be required to achieve improvements in quality of physical health care for this population.
| S-EPMC6443568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In a deinstitutionalised mental health care system, those with mental illness require complex, multidisciplinary and intersectoral care at the primary or community service setting. This paper describes an Evidence Map of different strategies to strengthen the provision of mental health care at the primary health care (PHC) setting, the quality of the evidence, and knowledge gaps. Electronic and reference searching yielded 2666 articles of which 306 qualified for data extraction. A systematic review methodology identified nine different strategies that strengthen the provision of mental healthcare and these strategies are mapped in line with the outcomes they affect. The top three strategies that were reported the most, included strategies to empower families, carers and patients; integration of care or collaborative interventions; and e-health interventions. The least reported strategy was task shifting. The Evidence Map further shows the amount and quality of evidence supporting each of the listed strategies, and this helps to inform policy design and research priorities around mental health. This is the first systematic Evidence Map to show the different strategies that strengthen the provision of mental healthcare at PHC setting and the impact these strategies have on patient, hospital and societal level indicators.
| S-EPMC6731011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeGuidelines recommend screening patients for unhealthy behaviors and mental health concerns. Health risk assessments can systematically identify patient needs and trigger care. This study seeks to evaluate whether primary care practices can routinely implement such assessments into routine care.MethodsAs part of a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial, 9 diverse primary care practices implemented My Own Health Report (MOHR)-an electronic or paper-based health behavior and mental health assessment and feedback system paired with counseling and goal setting. We observed how practices integrated MOHR into their workflows, what additional practice staff time it required, and what percentage of patients completed a MOHR assessment (Reach).ResultsMost practices approached (60%) agreed to adopt MOHR. How they implemented MOHR depended on practice resources, informatics capacity, and patient characteristics. Three practices mailed patients invitations to complete MOHR on the Web, 1 called patients and completed MOHR over the telephone, 1 had patients complete MOHR on paper in the office, and 4 had staff help patients complete MOHR on the Web in the office. Overall, 3,591 patients were approached and 1,782 completed MOHR (Reach = 49.6%). Reach varied by implementation strategy with higher reach when MOHR was completed by staff than by patients (71.2% vs 30.2%, P <.001). No practices were able to sustain the complete MOHR assessment without adaptations after study completion. Fielding MOHR increased staff and clinician time an average of 28 minutes per visit.ConclusionsPrimary care practices can implement health behavior and mental health assessments, but counseling patients effectively requires effort. Practices will need more support to implement and sustain assessments.
| S-EPMC4226773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe density of information in digital health records offers new potential opportunities for automated prediction of cost-relevant outcomes.AimsWe investigated the extent to which routinely recorded data held in the electronic health record (EHR) predict priority service outcomes and whether natural language processing tools enhance the predictions. We evaluated three high priority outcomes: in-patient duration, readmission following in-patient care and high service cost after first presentation.MethodWe used data obtained from a clinical database derived from the EHR of a large mental healthcare provider within the UK. We combined structured data with text-derived data relating to diagnosis statements, medication and psychiatric symptomatology. Predictors of the three different clinical outcomes were modelled using logistic regression with performance evaluated against a validation set to derive areas under receiver operating characteristic curves.ResultsIn validation samples, the full models (using all available data) achieved areas under receiver operating characteristic curves between 0.59 and 0.85 (in-patient duration 0.63, readmission 0.59, high service use 0.85). Adding natural language processing-derived data to the models increased the variance explained across all clinical scenarios (observed increase in r2 = 12-46%).ConclusionsEHR data offer the potential to improve routine clinical predictions by utilising previously inaccessible data. Of our scenarios, prediction of high service use after initial presentation achieved the highest performance.
| S-EPMC7001466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With rapid growth and development in recent decades, the State of Qatar has been redefining strategies and policies towards building a world-class healthcare system. Mental health has emerged as a priority area for development. As a result, mental health services in the region are being redefined and expanded, and this was realised with the launching of the ambitious National Mental Health Strategy in 2013. Traditionally, mental healthcare in Qatar had been considered to be the remit of psychiatrists within secondary care. The new strategy supported the transition towards community-based care. It outlined a plan to design and build a comprehensive and integrated mental health system, offering treatment in a range of settings. In this article, we provide an overview of the advent of primary care mental health services in Qatar. We discuss the historical aspects of psychiatric care and development of primary care mental health services in Qatar.
| S-EPMC8274405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGreater understanding of the impact of low intensity psychosocial interventions delivered by behavioral health clinicians (BHCs) working in an integrated care program (ICP) may promote better depression care.MethodIn a randomized controlled trial, 153 participants identified as depressed by their primary care provider (PCP) were assigned to ICP or usual care (UC, management by PCP, including specialty referral). In the ICP condition, BHCs worked collaboratively with PCPs and liaison psychiatrists.ResultsICP participants with lower and higher severity symptoms reported significantly greater use of coping strategies than UC participants at the 1-month follow up (lower: p = .002; higher: p = .016). ICP participants with lower severity continued to report significantly greater use of coping strategies than UC participants at the 4-month (p = .024), and 7-month (p = .012) follow ups. ICP participants were more likely to be following relapse preventions plans at the 4-month follow up (lower: 89.5% vs. 50%, p = .0.000; higher 74.1% vs. 33%, p = .0001). ICP participants also reported use of antidepressant medications on more days than UC participants at the 4-month follow up (lower: 21.27 vs. 14.49 days, p = .049; higher: 24.61 vs. 17.08 days, p = .035). Patient retention in the ICP was high, and ICP participants were significantly more satisfied with depression care than UC participants at follow-up assessments.DiscussionDelivery of low intensity psychosocial interventions by BHCs was associated with improvements to behavior charge targets. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
| S-EPMC7097878 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGoal-setting is recommended for patients with multimorbidity, but there is little evidence to support its use in general practice.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of goal-setting for patients with multimorbidity, before undertaking a definitive trial.Design and settingCluster-randomised controlled feasibility trial of goal-setting compared with control in six general practices.ParticipantsAdults with two or more long term health conditions and at risk of unplanned hospital admission.InterventionsGeneral practitioners (GPs) underwent training and patients were asked to consider goals before an initial goal-setting consultation and a follow-up consultation 6 months later. The control group received usual care planning.Outcome measuresHealth-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), capability (ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people), Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care and healthcare use. All consultations were video-recorded or audio-recorded, and focus groups were held with participating GPs and patients.ResultsFifty-two participants were recruited with a response rate of 12%. Full follow-up data were available for 41. In the goal-setting group, mean age was 80.4 years, 54% were female and the median number of prescribed medications was 13, compared with 77.2 years, 39% female and 11.5 medications in the control group. The mean initial consultation time was 23.0 min in the goal-setting group and 19.2 in the control group. Overall 28% of patient participants had no cognitive impairment. Participants set between one and three goals on a wide range of subjects, such as chronic disease management, walking, maintaining social and leisure interests, and weight management. Patient participants found goal-setting acceptable and would have liked more frequent follow-up. GPs unanimously liked goal-setting and felt it delivered more patient-centred care, and they highlighted the importance of training.ConclusionsThis goal-setting intervention was feasible to deliver in general practice. A larger, definitive study is needed to test its effectiveness.Trial registration numberISRCTN13248305; Post-results.
| S-EPMC6561432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-reported substance use is more likely to be influenced by underreporting bias compared to the biological markers. Underreporting bias or validity of self-reported substance use depends on the study population and cannot be generalized to the entire population. This study aimed to compare the validity of self-reported substance use between research setting and primary health care setting from the same source population.Methods and materialsThe population in this study included from Rafsanjan Youth Cohort Study (RYCS) and from primary care health centers. The sample from RYCS is made up 607 participants, 113 (18.62%) women and 494 (81.38%) men and sample from PHC centers is made up 522 individuals including 252 (48.28%) women and 270 (51.72%) men. We compared two groups in respect of prevalence estimates based on self-reported substance use and urine test. Then for evaluating validity of self-reported substance use in both group, the results of reference standard, urine tests, were compared with the results of self-reported drug use using measures of concordance.ResultsThe prevalence of substance use based on urine test was significantly higher in both settings compared to self-reported substance use over the past 72 h. The sensitivity of self-report substance use over the past 72 h in research setting was 39.4, 20, 10% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively and in primary health care setting was 50, 20.7, 12.5% and zero for opium, methadone, cannabis and amphetamine, respectively. The level of agreement between self-reported substance use over the past 72 h and urine test indicated fair and moderate agreement for opium in both research and primary health care settings, respectively and also slight agreement for methadone and cannabis in both settings were reported. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of self-reported substance use. For all substances, the level of agreement increased with longer recall periods. The specificity of self-report for all substances in both groups was more than 99%.ConclusionIndividuals in primary health care setting were more likely to self-reported substance use than in research setting, but setting did not have a statistically significant effect in terms of self-reported substance use. Programs that rely on self-reported substance use may not estimate the exact prevalence of substance use in both research and primary health care settings, especially for substances that have a higher social stigma. Therefore, it is recommended that self-report and biological indicators be used for more accurate evaluation in substance use studies. It is also suggested that future epidemiological studies be performed to reduce bias of social desirability and find a method providing the highest level of privacy.
| S-EPMC8439053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTerrorist attacks commonly have mental health consequences for those directly affected. Existing research is, however, divided when it comes to how and whether terrorist attacks affect the general population's mental health. There is a need for studies investigating a broader range of mental health reactions to understand more about how different groups of the population are affected by terrorist attacks, while also illuminating important systemic factors.MethodsIn this study we investigated whether there was any change in the number of consultations with out-of-hours emergency primary care for psychological reactions in association with the 2011 terrorist attacks in Norway. Data covering the entire Norwegian population's primary care contacts in 2008-2013, where the reason for encounter was coded as psychological concerns or psychiatric disorders, were studied. A time series intervention analysis, using ARIMA modelling, was used to estimate whether there was indeed a change in healthcare utilisation associated with the terrorist attacks.ResultsThe analysis uncovered an increase in contacts with emergency primary care by the overall population for mental health concerns associated with the terrorist attacks. When divided into groups according to geographical proximity to attacks, no significant change was found in the area closest to the attack in Oslo, whereas an increase was found for the rest of the country. There was also heterogeneity across different age groups. An increase was found among youths, young adults, and middle-aged people, but not the other age groups, and an increase was found for both men and women.ConclusionsThese findings highlight the need for primary care services to be prepared to meet mental health reactions in the general population when planning for healthcare provision in the aftermath of terrorism. Simultaneously, it should be noted that needs may vary across different groups of the population.
| S-EPMC10668408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To identify a generic set of face valid quality indicators for primary care mental health services which reflect a multi-stakeholder perspective and can be used for facilitating quality improvement. DESIGN:Modified two-round postal Delphi questionnaire. SETTING:Geographical spread across Great Britain. PARTICIPANTS:One hundred and fifteen panellists representing 11 different stakeholder groups within primary care mental health services (clinical psychologist, health and social care commissioner, community psychiatric nurse, counsellor, general practitioner, practice nurse/district nurse/health visitor, psychiatrist, social worker, carer, patient and voluntary organisations). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Face validity (median rating of 8 or 9 on a nine point scale with agreement by all panels) for assessing quality of care. RESULTS:A maximum of 334 indicators were rated by panels in the second round; 26% were rated valid by all panels. These indicators were categorised into 21 aspects of care, 11 relating to general practices and 10 relating to health authorities or primary care groups/trusts. There was variation in the total number of indicators rated valid across the different panels. Overall, GPs rated the lowest number of indicators as valid (41%, n=138) and carers rated the highest number valid (91%, n=304). CONCLUSIONS:The quality indicators represent consensus among key stakeholder groups in defining quality of care within primary care mental health services. These indicators could provide a guide for primary care organisations embarking on quality improvement initiatives in mental health care when addressing national targets and standards relating to primary care set out in the National Service Framework for Mental Health for England. Although many of the indicators relate to parochial issues in UK service delivery, the methodology used in the development of the indicators could be applied in other settings to produce locally relevant indicators.
| S-EPMC1743692 | biostudies-literature