Dataset Information

The impact of primary care behavioral health services on patient behaviors: A randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Greater 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.

Method

In 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.

Results

ICP 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.

Discussion

SUBMITTER: Robinson P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7097878 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of primary care behavioral health services on patient behaviors: A randomized controlled trial.

Robinson Patricia P Von Korff Michael M Bush Terry T Lin Elizabeth H B EHB Ludman Evette J EJ

Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare 20200301 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Greater 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.<h4>Method</h4>In 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 ...[more]

PMID: 32202830

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:An estimated 8.2 million adults in the United States live with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. Although the benefits of integrated treatment services for persons with co-occurring disorders has been well-established, gaps in access to integrated care persist. Implementation research can address this gap. We evaluated if the Network for the Improvement of Addiction Treatment (NIATx) implementation strategy was effective in increasing integrated services capacity among organizations treating persons with co-occurring disorders. METHODS:This study employed a cluster randomized waitlist control group design. Forty-nine addiction treatment organizations from the State of Washington were randomized into one of two study arms: (1) NIATx strategy (active implementation strategy), or (2) waitlist (control). The primary outcome was a standardized organizational measure of integrated service capability: the Dual Diagnosis in Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) Index. Intent-to-treat analyses and per-protocol analyses were conducted to address the following questions: (1) Is NIATx effective in increasing integrated service capacity? and (2) Are there differences in organizations that actually use NIATx per-protocol versus those that do not? RESULTS:From baseline to one-year post active implementation, both the NIATx strategy and waitlist arms demonstrated improvements over time in DDCAT Index total and DDCAT dimension scores. In intent-to-treat analyses, a moderate but statistically significant difference in improvement between study arms was seen only in the Program Milieu dimension (p =?0.020, Cohen's d?=?0.54). In per-protocol analyses, moderate-to-large effects in Program Milieu (p =?0.002, Cohen's d?=?0.91) and Continuity of Care (p =?0.026, Cohen's d?=?0.63) dimensions, and in total DDCAT Index (p =?0.046, Cohen's d?=?0.51) were found. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, organizations in both study arms improved DDCAT Index scores over time. Organizations in the NIATx strategy arm with full adherence to the NIATx protocol had significantly greater improvements in the primary outcome measure of integrated service capacity for persons with co-occurring disorders. TRAIL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03007940 . Retrospectively registered January 2017.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Urban Primary Health Care Project (UPHCP) was implemented by the Government of Bangladesh in response to rapid urbanization and growing inequalities in access to and quality of primary health care. The goal of the project was to improve health status of the urban poor living in city corporations and municipalities through the provision of health care services by NGOs that are contracted through public-private partnership. The first phase of the project started in 1998 and the project is currently in its fourth phase covering more urban areas than the first three phases. This study evaluates the impact of the second phase project (UPHCP-II) on health outcomes, mainly child diarrhea, acute respiratory infection, antenatal and postnatal care, skilled birth attendance, breastfeeding prevalence, contraceptive prevalence, sexually transmitted infections, and HIV/AIDS awareness. METHODS:The effect of the project was estimated through propensity score matching between project and non-project areas comparing baseline and endline surveys over a six-year period from 2006 to 2012. An innovation of this study is the recalibration of the sampling weights that allows the use of these two independent surveys in impact evaluation. RESULTS:Over the six-year period, UPHCP-II improved the health status of the population in project areas compared to non-project areas. The study found significant improvement in health outcomes in terms of reduced diarrhea and acute respiratory infection in children, which explains the downward trend in child mortality rate. Moreover, the project also improved antenatal care and skilled birth attendance. Contraceptive prevalence and HIV/AIDS awareness and avoidance increased, and sexually transmitted infections decreased. CONCLUSIONS:UPHCP-II was effective in achieving its health outcome targets, while previous studies show that it was efficient in the delivery of health care and clients were highly satisfied because health facilities were in close proximity, and doctors and staff were perceived as responsive in delivering high quality of care. The results of this study could help inform future design and implementation of urban health interventions that involve contracting primary health care service delivery in Bangladesh and other similar settings.

Project description:BackgroundThe acceptance of digital health technologies to support patient care for various clinical conditions among primary care providers and staff has not been explored.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to explore the extent of potential differences between major groups of providers and staff in primary care, including behavioral health consultants (BHCs; eg, psychologists, social workers, and counselors), primary care providers (PCPs; eg, physicians and nurse practitioners), and nurses (registered nurses and licensed practical nurses) in the acceptance of various health technologies (ie, mobile apps, wearables, live video, phone, email, instant chats, text messages, social media, and patient portals) to support patient care across a variety of clinical situations.MethodsWe surveyed 151 providers (51 BHCs, 52 PCPs, and 48 nurses) embedded in primary care clinics across the United States who volunteered to respond to a web-based survey distributed in December 2020 by a large health care market research company. Respondents indicated the technologies they consider appropriate to support patients' health care needs across the following clinical contexts: acute and chronic disease, medication management, health-promoting behaviors, sleep, substance use, and common and serious mental health conditions. We used descriptive statistics to summarize the distribution of demographic characteristics by provider type. We used contingency tables to compile summaries of the proportion of provider types endorsing each technology within and across clinical contexts. This study was exploratory in nature, with the intent to inform future research.ResultsMost of the respondents were from urban and suburban settings (125/151, 82.8%), with 12.6% (n=19) practicing in rural or frontier settings and 4.6% (n=7) practicing in rural-serving clinics. Respondents were dispersed across the United States, including the Northeast (31/151, 20.5%), Midwest (n=32, 21.2%), South (n=49, 32.5%), and West (n=39, 25.8%). The highest acceptance for technologies across clinical contexts was among BHCs (32/51, 63%) and PCPs (30/52, 58%) for live video and among nurses for mobile apps (30/48, 63%). A higher percentage of nurses accepted all other technologies relative to BHCs and PCPs. Similarly, relative to other groups, PCPs indicated lower levels of acceptance. Within clinical contexts, the highest acceptance rates were reported among 80% (41/51) of BHCs and 69% (36/52) of PCPs endorsing live video for common mental health conditions and 75% (36/48) of nurses endorsing mobile apps for health-promoting behaviors. The lowest acceptance across providers was for social media in the context of medication management (9.3% [14/151] endorsement across provider type).ConclusionsThe survey suggests potential differences in the way primary care clinicians and staff envision using technologies to support patient care. Future work must attend to reasons for differences in the acceptance of various technologies across providers and clinical contexts. Such an understanding will help inform appropriate implementation strategies to increase acceptability and gain greater adoption of appropriate technologies across conditions and patient populations.

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.

Dataset Information

The impact of primary care behavioral health services on patient behaviors: A randomized controlled trial.

Introduction

Method

Results

Discussion

Publications

The impact of primary care behavioral health services on patient behaviors: A randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets