Measuring the integration of primary care and behavioral health services.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a factor analysis of the Practice Integration Profile (PIP), a 30-item practice-level measure of primary care and behavioral health integration derived from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Lexicon for Behavioral Health and Primary Care Integration. DATA SOURCES: The PIP was completed by 735 individuals, representing 357 practices across the United States. STUDY DESIGN: The study design was a cross-sectional survey. An exploratory factor analysis and assessment of internal consistency reliability via Cronbach's alpha were performed. DATA COLLECTION METHODS: Participant responses were collected using REDCap, a secure, web-based data capture tool. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Five of the PIP's six domains had factor loadings for most items related to each factor representing the PIP of 0.50 or greater. However, one factor had items from two PIP domains that had loadings >0.50. A five-factor model with redistributed items resulted in improved factor loadings for all domains along with greater internal consistency reliability (>0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Five of the PIP's six domains demonstrated excellent internal consistency for measures of health care resources. Although minor improvements to strengthen the PIP are possible, it is a valid and reliable measure of the integration of primary care and behavioral health.

Development and validation of a measure of primary care behavioral health integration.

INTRODUCTION: We developed the Practice Integration Profile (PIP) to measure the degree of behavioral health integration in clinical practices with a focus on primary care (PC). Its 30 items, completed by providers, managers, and staff, provide an overall score and 6 domain scores derived from the Lexicon of Collaborative Care. We describe its history and psychometric properties. METHOD: The PIP was tested in a convenience sample of practices. Linear regression compared scores across integration exemplars, PC with behavioral services, PC without behavioral services, and community mental health centers without PC. An additional sample rated 4 scenarios describing practices with varying degrees of integration. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine surveys were returned. Mean domain scores ran from 49 to 65. The mean total score was 55 (median 58; range 0-100) with high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .95). The lowest total scores were for PC without behavioral health (27), followed by community mental health centers (44), PC with behavioral health (60), and the exemplars (86; p < .001). Eleven respondents rerated their practices 37 to 194 days later. The mean change was + 1.5 (standard deviation = 11.1). Scenario scores were highly correlated with the degree of integration each scenario was designed to represent (Spearman's ρ = -0.71; P = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: These data suggest that the PIP is useful, has face, content, and internal validity, and distinguishes among types of practices with known variations in integration. We discuss how the PIP may support practices and policymakers in their integration efforts and researchers assessing the degree to which integration affects patient health outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Practice Integration Profile: Rationale, development, method, and research.

Insufficient knowledge exists regarding how to measure the presence and degree of integrated care. Prior estimates of integration levels are neither grounded in theory nor psychometrically validated. They provide scant guidance to inform improvement activities, compare integration efforts, discriminate among practices by degree of integration, measure the effect of integration on quadruple aim outcomes, or address the needs of clinicians, regulators, and policymakers seeking new models of health care delivery and funding. We describe the development of the Practice Integration Profile (PIP), a novel instrument designed to measure levels of integrated behavioral health care within a primary care clinic. The PIP draws upon the Agency for Health care Research & Quality's (AHRQ) Lexicon of Collaborative Care which provides theoretic justification for a paradigm case of collaborative care. We used the key clauses of the Lexicon to derive domains of integration and generate measures corresponding to those key clauses. After reviewing currently used methods for identifying collaborative care, or integration, and identifying the need to improve on them, we describe a national collaboration to describe and evaluate the PIP. We also describe its potential use in practice improvement, research, responsiveness to multiple stakeholder needs, and other future directions. (PsycINFO Database Record

Under Construction: One State's Approach to Creating Health Homes for Individuals with Serious Mental Illness.

Changes to the health care market associated with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) are creating both need and opportunity for states, health plans, and providers to improve quality, outcomes, and satisfaction through better integration of traditionally separate health care delivery systems. Applications of the term "integrated care" vary widely and include, but are not limited to, the integration of care for Medicare-Medicaid dually enrolled beneficiaries, the integration of mental health and substance abuse (also known as behavioral health), and the integration of mental health and substance abuse with medical care, most commonly primary care. In this article, integrated care refers to well-coordinated physical health and behavioral health care. Medicaid Health Homes are emerging as a promising practice, with sixteen states having adopted the Health Home model through approved State Plan Amendments. This article describes one state's journey towards establishing Health Homes with a behavioral health focus. We discuss a partnership model between the relevant state organizations, the contracted providers, and the behavioral health managed care organization responsible for many of the supportive administrative functions. We highlight successes and operational challenges and offer recommendations for future Health Home development efforts.

Behavioral health referrals and treatment initiation rates in integrated primary care: a Collaborative Care Research Network study.

Although the benefits of integrating behavioral health (BH) services into primary care are well established (World Health Organization and World Organization of Family Doctors, 2012; Chiles et al. in Clin Psychol-Sci Pr 6:204-220, 1999; Cummings 1997; O'Donohue et al. 2003; Olfson et al. in Health Aff 18:79-93, 1999; Katon et al. in Ann Intern Med 124:917-925, 2001; Simon et al. in Arch Gen Psychiatry 52:850-856, 1995; Anderson et al. in Diabetes Care 24:1069-1078, 2001; Ciechanowski et al. in Arch Intern Med 160:3278-3285, 2000; Egede et al. in Diabetes Care 25:464-470, 2002), research has focused primarily on describing the types of interventions behavioral health providers (BHPs) employ rather than on reasons for referral, treatment initiation rates, or the patient characteristics that may impact them. This study presents the results of a multisite card study organized by The Collaborative Care Research Network, a subnetwork of the American Academy of Family Physicians' National Research Network devoted to conducting practice-based research focused on the provision of BH and health behavior services within primary care practices. The goals of the study included: (1) identifying the characteristics of patients referred for BH services; (2) codifying reasons for referral and whether patients were treated for the referral; (3) exploring any differences between patients who initiated BH contact and those who did not; and (4) assessing the types and frequency of BH services provided to patients who attended at least one appointment. Of the 200 patients referred to a BHP, 81 % had an initial contact, 71 % of which occurred on the same day. Men and women were equally likely to engage with a BHP although the time between appointments varied by gender. Depression and anxiety were the primary reasons for referral. Practice-based research is a viable strategy for advancing the knowledge about integrated primary care.