Informing implementation and dissemination of a specialized primary care medical home for patients with serious mental illness: Clinician and administrator perspectives.

People with serious mental illness (SMI) have lower rates of use of preventative medical services and higher rates of mortality compared to the general population. Research shows that specialized primary care medical homes improve the health care of patients with SMI and are feasible to implement, safe, and more effective than usual care. However, specialized medical homes remain uncommon and model dissemination limited. As part of a controlled trial assessing an SMI-specialized medical home, we examined clinician and administrator perspectives regarding specialized versus mainstream primary care and identified ways to enhance the scale-up of a specialized primary care model for future dissemination. We conducted semistructured interviews with clinicians and administrators at three sites prior to the implementation of an SMI-specialized primary care medical home (n = 26) and at 1-year follow-up (n = 24); one site implemented the intervention, and two sites served as controls. Interviews captured service design features that affected the quality of care provided; contextual factors that supported or impeded medical home implementation; and knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding the care of patients with SMI. Interviews were transcribed and coded. Clinicians and administrators described SMI-specialized primary care medical homes as advancing care coordination and outcomes for patients with SMI. Stakeholders identified elements of a specialized medical home that they viewed as superior to usual care, including having a holistic picture of patients' needs and greater care coordination. However, to enable scale-up, efforts are needed to increase staffing on care teams, develop robust clinician onboarding or training, and ensure close coordination with mental health care providers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Variation in benefit among patients with serious mental illness who receive integrated psychiatric and primary care.

PURPOSE: The population with serious mental illness has high risk for hospitalization or death due to unhealthy behaviors and inadequate medical care, though the level of risk varies substantially. Programs that integrate medical and psychiatric services improve outcomes but are challenging to implement and access is limited. It would be useful to know whether benefits are confined to patients with specific levels of risk. METHODS: In a population with serious mental illness and increased risk for hospitalization or death, a specialized medical home integrated services and improved treatment and outcomes. Treatment quality, chronic illness care, care experience, symptoms, and quality of life were assessed for a median of 385 days. Analyses examine whether improvements varied by baseline level of patient risk. RESULTS: Patients with greater risk were more likely to be older, more cognitively impaired, and have worse mental health. Integrated services increased appropriate screening for body mass index, lipids, and glucose, but increases did not differ significantly by level of risk. Integrated services also improved chronic illness care, care experience, mental health-related quality of life, and psychotic symptoms. There were also no significant differences by risk level. CONCLUSIONS: There were benefits from integration of primary care and psychiatric care at all levels of increased risk, including those with extremely high risk above the 95th percentile. When developing integrated care programs, patients should be considered at all levels of risk, not only those who are the healthiest.

The Characteristics of People with Serious Mental Illness Who are at High Risk for Hospitalization or Death.

Many individuals with serious mental illness are at high risk for hospitalization or death due to inadequate treatment of medical conditions or unhealthy behaviors. The authors describe demographic and clinical characteristics associated with increased risk in this population. Electronic data were obtained for individuals in treatment at a large Veterans' healthcare system who were at high risk according to a validated model. A random sample of these individuals was assessed in person. Multivariable regressions estimated the effect of numerous demographic, health, and clinical characteristics on risk. Emergency visits and hospitalizations were common. Greater risk was associated with being male, not married, and having more diagnoses. While risk varied by race, this effect was no longer significant after controlling for other factors. Health-related quality of life worsened with increasing risk. Routine data identify a large population of high-risk individuals who may benefit from outreach to provide healthcare services.

Testing an implementation package in a housing skills training pilot for homeless-experienced persons with serious mental illness.

Background: Evidence-based practices (EBPs) improve housing and health for persons who have experienced homelessness with serious mental illness (PEH-SMI) but are challenging to implement. We tested a strategy to support pilot implementation of a 12-session housing skills training intervention for PEH-SMI, tailored from effective social skills training interventions. We aimed to optimize the implementation strategy and intervention prior to an implementation trial. Method: We provided training and technical assistance to nine providers to support pilot implementation of this intervention to six groups of PEH-SMI (n = 35) engaged in VA Greater Los Angeles' homeless services. We used scales and semi-structured interviews with 14 PEH-SMI and all interventionists to inform implementation strategy adaptations, identify factors that impacted implementation, and assess perceptions of the intervention. Attendance was tracked and we observed a random sample of each interventionist's groups to assess treatment fidelity. Results: Interventionists perceived the implementation strategy and the intervention favorably. However, interventionists often lacked physical space, staff, and resources (e.g., computers) to conduct the intervention. Interventionists found the content valuable for participants and a few suggested that group engagement should be a prerequisite for obtaining housing services. PEH-SMI were interested in the intervention's content and receptive to the group-based format. Participants attended a mean of 4 ± 3/12 groups; all groups observed had acceptable fidelity. Problems with intervention retention were described, suggesting challenges maintaining group participation when participants transitioned between VA homeless services. Conclusions: To support the implementation of an EBP for PEH-SMI in homeless programs, these data suggest the value of training/technical assistance and strategies that enhance program-level buy-in to address resource concerns. Intervention adaptations, e.g., using a drop-in, open group format, in community-based settings that are easily accessible to PEH-SMI, may also increase adoption. This project was registered as "Improving Housing Outcomes for Homeless Veterans" Trial registration NCT03646149, registered 8/24/2018.

There are effective social skills programs for people with serious psychiatric disorders; we adapted these programs into a 12-session housing skills program for people who had experienced homelessness. We then tested a training and technical assistance package to support the program's delivery by nine providers (e.g., social workers) to six groups of homeless people with serious psychiatric disorders (n = 35). We used surveys and interviews with some participants (n = 14) and all involved providers (n = 9) to understand their perspectives on our training and technical assistance, as well as the program itself; and to assess their views on factors that affected the program's use in real-world settings. We tracked participants' attendance at the groups and observed a random selection of groups to see if providers adhered to key program elements. We found that participants attended an average of one-third of the program's groups (4/12) but that providers were able to deliver the program to include all key elements. Some providers lacked important resources (e.g., classroom space or computers) to deliver the program as it was intended; they liked the training and technical assistance offered. Participants liked the program's content and format. Difficulties with participant retention may relate to drop-out from homeless services in which the program was delivered. This pilot project suggests that getting buy-in from leaders across levels and structuring the program as a drop-in group, in the community, or in places where attendance is easy for participants may increase its likelihood of being used as part of routine homeless services.