Discussing measurement-based care with patients: An analysis of clinician-patient dyads.

Abstract Measurement-based care (MBC) refers to the use of three integrated strategies to improve effectiveness of behavioral health care: routine outcomes monitoring using symptom measures; regularly sharing these data with patients; and using these data to inform treatment decisions. This study examined how clinicians discuss MBC data with patients, including identifying what aspects of these discussions contribute to clinician-patient agreement on the value of MBC, and how clinicians use MBC data to inform treatment decisions. Twenty-six clinician-patient dyads participated in semi-structured interviews and provided a treatment session recording in which MBC data were discussed. Qualitative data analyses revealed four subtypes of dyads: clinician and patient both valued MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient passively participated in MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient had mixed perceptions of MBC; clinician and patient reported moderate or low value for MBC. In dyads for whom both the clinician and patient valued MBC, the clinician provided clear and repeated rationale for MBC, discussed data with patients at every administration, and connected observed scores to patient skills or strategies. Emerging best practices for discussing MBC include providing a strong rationale, discussing results frequently, actively engaging patients in discussions, and using graphs to visualize progress.

Maintenance and Reach of Exposure Psychotherapy for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder 18 Months After Training.

This study examined aspects of clinicians' work environment that facilitated sustained use of prolonged exposure (PE) therapy. Surveys were completed by 566 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs clinicians 6 and 18 months after intensive training in PE. The number of patients treated with PE at 18 months (reach) was modeled as a function of clinician demographics, clinician beliefs about PE, and work context factors. There were 342 clinicians (60.4%) who used PE at 6 and 18 months after training, 58 (10.2%) who used PE at 18 but not 6 months, 95 (16.7%) who used PE at 6 but not 18 months, and 71 (12.5%) who never adopted PE. Median reach was 12% of clinicians' appointments with patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. Reach was predicted by flow of interested patients (incident response ratio [IRR] = 1.21 to 1.51), PE's perceived effectiveness (IRR = 1.04 to 1.31), working in a PTSD specialty clinic (IRR = 1.06 to 1.26), seeing more patients weekly (IRR = 1.04 to 1.25), and seeing fewer patients in groups (IRR = 0.83 to 0.99). Most clinicians trained in PE sustained use of the treatment, but on a limited basis. Strategies to increase reach of PE should address organizational barriers and patient engagement.

Context Matters: Team and Organizational Factors Associated with Reach of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies for PTSD in the Veterans Health Administration.

Evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD are often underused. The objective of this mixed-method study was to identify organizational and clinic factors that promote high levels of reach of evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD 10 years into their dissemination throughout the Veterans Health Administration. We conducted 96 individual interviews with staff from ten outpatient PTSD teams at nine sites that differed in reach of evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD. Major themes associated with reach included clinic mission, clinic leader and staff engagement, clinic operations, staff perceptions, and the practice environment. Strategies to improve reach of evidence-based psychotherapies should attend to organizational and team-level factors.

Impact of Implementation Facilitation on the REACH VET Clinical Program for Veterans at Risk for Suicide.

OBJECTIVE: In 2017, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a national suicide prevention program, called Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment (REACH VET), that uses a predictive algorithm to identify, attempt to reach, assess, and care for patients at the highest risk for suicide. The authors aimed to evaluate whether facilitation enhanced implementation of REACH VET at VHA facilities not meeting target completion rates. METHODS: In this hybrid effectiveness-implementation type 2 program evaluation, a quasi-experimental pre-post design was used to assess changes in implementation outcome measures evaluated 6 months before and 6 months after onset of facilitation of REACH VET implementation at 23 VHA facilities. Measures included percentages of patients with documented coordinator and provider acknowledgment of receipt, care evaluation, and outreach attempt. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare differences in REACH VET outcome measures before and after facilitation. Qualitative interviews were conducted with personnel and were explored via template analysis. RESULTS: Time had a significant effect in all outcomes models (p<0.001). An effect of facilitation was significant only for the outcome of attempted outreach. Patients identified by REACH VET had significantly higher odds of having a documented outreach attempt after facilitation of REACH VET implementation, compared with before facilitation. Site personnel felt supported and reported that the external facilitators were helpful and responsive. CONCLUSIONS: Facilitation of REACH VET implementation was associated with an improvement in outreach attempts to veterans identified as being at increased risk for suicide. Outreach is critical for engaging veterans in care.

Barriers and Facilitators to Dialectical Behavior Therapy Skills Groups in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is a multimodal evidence-based suicide prevention psychotherapy with barriers to full implementation. This study qualitatively examined barriers and facilitators to the DBT skills group treatment mode, which can be implemented as a stand-alone intervention. Using data from a national mixed-methods program evaluation of DBT in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), this is the first article to examine barriers and facilitators to DBT skills groups implemented with a DBT consultation team or as a stand-alone intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A subset of data from semi-structured telephone interviews of six clinicians and three administrators (n = 9 respondents) was analyzed to provide complementarity and expansion on prior quantitative findings. The data were coded using an iterative process based on content analysis and a codebook based on the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. The study was approved by the institutional review board for the Palo Alto VA Health Care System. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were organized by Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services domains of evidence, context, and facilitation. Results showed how reduced leadership support and low receptivity to providing DBT skills groups functioned as barriers and also identified a barrier not described earlier in the literature: the perception that this group could conflict with expanding access to care for more veterans. The results showed how leadership supported implementation, including by mapping clinic grids and supporting training, and also revealed how a supportive culture among providers facilitated division of labor between skills group providers, and how offering a treatment that filled a gap in services supported the group. At some sites, a provider with prior DBT experience was instrumental in starting DBT skills groups or developing ongoing training. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitatively analyzed barriers and facilitators to a group-delivered suicide prevention intervention, DBT skills groups, expanded on quantitative findings on the importance of leadership support, culture, and training as facilitators. Future work implementing DBT skills group as a stand-alone treatment will need to address the barrier of receptivity and perceived barriers about access to care.

Development of a qualitative data analysis codebook informed by the i-PARIHS framework.

BACKGROUND: The Integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework and its predecessor, PARIHS, have been widely utilized in implementation studies. Although i-PARIHS developers have focused on creating tools to guide facilitators in its application in practice, tools are also needed for evaluation and research. Codebooks with clear and meaningful code labels and definitions are an important component of qualitative data analysis and have been developed for other widely used frameworks. There is no such codebook for i-PARIHS. Additionally, sub-constructs for the Innovation, Recipients, and Context constructs lack definitions, and there is no sub-classification of facilitation activities for the Facilitation construct. The lack of a standardized codebook hinders our ability to synthesize research findings across studies, explore and test the range of activities that are utilized in facilitation efforts, and potentially validate and further refine i-PARIHS. This paper describes a rigorous process of developing a detailed qualitative codebook informed by the i-PARIHS framework. METHODS: A workgroup of qualitative researchers conducted a rigorous four-phase process to develop a codebook informed by i-PARIHS. In phase 1, workgroup members reviewed and discussed literature, consulted an organizational scientist, and drafted and refined subcodes and definitions for i-PARIHS constructs. In phase 2, they obtained feedback from an expert panel and further refined subcodes and definitions. In phase 3, they obtained feedback from i-PARIHS developers/experts and incorporated it into the codebook. Finally, two studies piloted the application of the codebook which informed the final version. RESULTS: The resulting i-PARIHS-informed codebook includes definitions for the four main constructs of the framework: Innovation, Recipients, Context, and Facilitation; subcodes and definitions for characteristics of each of these constructs; and instructions for the suggested application of individual codes and use of the codebook generally. CONCLUSIONS: The standardized codes and definitions in the codebook can facilitate data exploration, pattern identification, and insight development informed by the i-PARIHS framework. Qualitative analysts can also use them to explore interactions between i-PARIHS constructs, maximize the potential for comparing findings across studies, and support the refinement of the i-PARIHS framework using empirical findings from multiple studies.

Which patients initiate cognitive processing therapy and prolonged exposure in department of veterans affairs PTSD clinics?

The United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT) and Prolonged Exposure therapy (PE) for PTSD at all of its facilities, but little is known about systematic differences between patients who do and do not initiate these treatments. VA administrative data were analyzed for 6,251 veterans receiving psychotherapy over one year in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) specialty clinics at nine VA medical centers. CPT and PE were initiated by 2,173 (35%) patients. Veterans' probability of initiating either CPT or PE (considered together) was 29% lower (adjusted odds ratio = .61) if they had a psychiatric hospitalization within the same year, and 15% lower (AOR = .78) if they had service-connected disability for PTSD. Veterans' probability of starting CPT or PE was 19% lower (AOR = .74) if they were Hispanic or Latino, 10% lower (AOR = .84), if they were male rather than female, and 9% lower (AOR = .87) if they were divorced, separated or widowed rather than currently married. Probability of receiving CPT or PE was also lower if verans had more co-occurring psychiatric diagnoses (AOR per diagnosis = .88), were older (AOR per every five years = .95), or lived further away from the VA clinic (AOR per every ten miles = .98). Nonetheless, most patients initiating CPT or PE had two or more comorbidities and were service-connected for PTSD. Observed gender, age and ethnic differences in initiation of CPT and PE appear unrelated to clinical suitability and warrant further study.

Barriers, facilitators, and benefits of implementation of dialectical behavior therapy in routine care: results from a national program evaluation survey in the Veterans Health Administration.

National implementation of evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) provides important lessons on the barriers and facilitators to implementation in a large healthcare system. Little is known about barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a complex EBP for emotional and behavioral dysregulation-dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT). The purpose of this study was to understand VHA clinicians' experiences with barriers, facilitators, and benefits from implementing DBT into routine care. This national program evaluation survey measured site characteristics of VHA sites (N = 59) that had implemented DBT. DBT was most often implemented in general mental health outpatient clinics. While 42% of sites offered all four modes of DBT, skills group was the most frequently implemented mode. Fifty-nine percent of sites offered phone coaching in any form, yet only 11% of those offered it all the time. Providers were often provided little to no time to support implementation of DBT. Barriers that were difficult to overcome were related to phone coaching outside of business hours. Facilitators to implementation included staff interest and expertise. Perceived benefits included increased hope and functioning for clients, greater self-efficacy and compassion for providers, and ability to treat unique symptoms for clinics. There was considerable variability in the capacity to address implementation barriers among sites implementing DBT in VHA routine care. Mental health policy makers should note the barriers and facilitators reported here, with specific attention to phone coaching barriers.

An RCT of Effects of Telephone Care Management on Treatment Adherence and Clinical Outcomes Among Veterans With PTSD.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed whether adding telephone care management to usual outpatient mental health care improved treatment attendance, medication compliance, and clinical outcomes of veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHODS: In a multisite randomized controlled trial, 358 veterans were assigned to either usual outpatient mental health treatment (N=165) or usual care plus twice-a-month telephone care management (TCM) and support in the first three months of treatment (N=193). Treatment utilization and medication refills were determined from U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs administrative data. PTSD, depression, quality of life, aggressive behavior, and substance use were assessed with self-report questionnaires at intake, four months, and 12 months. RESULTS: Telephone care managers reached 95% of TCM participants (N=182), completing an average 5.1 of 6.0 planned telephone calls. During the three-month intervention period, TCM participants completed 43% more mental health visits (M±SD=5.9±6.8) than did those in usual care (4.1±4.2) (incident rate ratio=1.36, χ2=6.56, df=1, p<.01). Treatment visits in the nine-month follow-up period and medication refills did not differ by condition. Only 9% of participants were scheduled to receive evidence-based psychotherapy. Slopes of improvement in PTSD, depression, alcohol misuse, drug problems, aggressive behavior, and quality of life did not differ by condition or treatment attendance. CONCLUSIONS: TCM improved PTSD patients' treatment attendance but not their outcomes. TCM can enhance treatment engagement, but outcomes depend on the effectiveness of the treatments that patients receive.

Dialectical Behavior Therapy Training and Desired Resources for Implementation: Results From a National Program Evaluation in the Veterans Health Administration.

CONTEXT: Little is known about nonresearch training experiences of providers who implement evidence-based psychotherapies for suicidal behaviors among veterans. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This national program evaluation identified the history of training, training needs, and desired resources of clinicians who work with at-risk veterans in a national health care system. This sequential mixed methods national program evaluation used a post-only survey design to obtain needs assessment data from clinical sites (N = 59) within Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities that implemented dialectical behavior therapy (DBT). Data were also collected on resources preferred to support ongoing use of DBT. RESULTS: While only 33% of clinical sites within VHA facilities reported that staff attended a formal DBT intensive training workshop, nearly 97% of participating sites reported having staff who completed self-study using DBT manuals. Mobile apps for therapists and clients and templates for documentation in the electronic health records to support measurement-based care were desired clinical resources. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that less-intensive training models can aid staff in implementing DBT in real-world health care settings. While more training is requested, a number of VHA facilities have successfully implemented DBT into the continuum of care for veterans at risk for suicide.