Examining the use of psychiatric collaborative care and behavioral health integration codes at federally qualified health centers: A mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite evidence to support the integration of behavioral health and physical health care, the adoption of Integrated Behavioral Health (IBH) has been stymied by a lack of reliable and sustainable financing mechanisms. This study aimed to provide information on the use of Psychiatric Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) and behavioral health integration (BHI) codes and the implementation of IBH in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). METHOD: This cross-sectional, mixed-methods study involved an electronic survey of administrators and follow-up qualitative interviews from a subset of survey respondents. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive analysis and thematic coding was used to analyze qualitative data to identify salient themes. RESULTS: Administrators (N = 52) from 11 states completed the survey. Use of CoCM (13%) or BHI codes (17.4%) was low. Most administrators were not aware that CoCM (72%) or BHI codes (70%) existed. Qualitative interviews (n = 9) described barriers that further complicate IBH and code use like workforce shortages and insufficient reimbursement for the cost to deliver CoCM services. DISCUSSION: Although FQHCs are working to meet the needs of the communities they serve, a lack of billing clarity and awareness and workforce issues hinder the adoption of the CoCM. FQHCs face many demands to provide care to safety net populations, yet are not fully equipped with the resources, workflows, staffing, and payment structures to support CoCM/BHI billing. Increased financial and logistical support to build practice infrastructure is needed to reduce the administrative complexity and inadequate reimbursement mechanisms that currently hinder the implementation of the CoCM and integrated care delivery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Harnessing the electronic health record to advance integrated care.

INTRODUCTION: Integrated health care is utilized in primary care clinics to meet patients' physical, behavioral, and social needs. Current methods to collect and evaluate the effectiveness of integrated care require refinement. Using informatics and electronic health records (EHR) to distill large amounts of clinical data may help researchers measure the impact of integrated care more efficiently. This exploratory pilot study aimed to (a) determine the feasibility of using EHR documentation to identify behavioral health and social care components of integrated care, using social work as a use case, and (b) develop a lexicon to inform future research using natural language processing. METHOD: Study steps included development of a preliminary lexicon of behavioral health and social care interventions to address basic needs, creation of an abstraction guide, identification of appropriate EHR notes, manual chart abstraction, revision of the lexicon, and synthesis of findings. RESULTS: Notes (N = 647) were analyzed from a random sample of 60 patients. Notes documented behavioral health and social care components of care but were difficult to identify due to inconsistencies in note location and titling. Although the interventions were not described in detail, the outcomes of screening, referral, and brief treatment were included. The integrated care team frequently used EHR to share information and communicate. DISCUSSION: Opportunities and challenges to using EHR data were identified and need to be addressed to better understand the behavioral health and social care interventions in integrated care. To best leverage EHR data, future research must determine how to document and extract pertinent information about integrated team-based interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Using Latent Class Analysis to Understand Social Worker Roles in Integrated Health Care.

Purpose: Social work (SW) is a profession that fulfills important roles on integrated health teams, yet there remains a lack of clarity on SW's functions. The current study sought to identify typologies of SW's roles on integrated care teams using latent class analysis (LCA).Method: An electronic survey was developed, piloted, and administered to Masters level SW students and practitioners in integrated health care settings (N = 395) regarding weekly use of interventions. LCA was conducted to estimate latent sub-groups of respondents.Results: Respondents reported an average of 14.6 (SD = 4.7) interventions. Five classes of SW roles were identified and varied by setting and focus. One class (13%) completed a hybrid function providing behavioral health and social care interventions.Conclusions: Classes of SW roles on teams may reflect varying models of integrated care. A flexible SW on the team may adapt to patient and clinic needs, but increases the opportunity for role confusion.

Mapping colocation: Using national provider identified data to assess primary care and behavioral health colocation.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports that integrated behavioral health care improves patient outcomes. Colocation, where health and behavioral health providers work in the same physical space, is a key element of integration, but national rates of colocation are unknown. We established national colocation rates and analyzed variation by primary care provider (PCP) type, practice size, rural/urban setting, Health and Human Services region, and state. METHOD: Data were from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' 2018 National Plan and Provider Enumeration System data set. Practice addresses of PCPs (family medicine, general practitioners, internal medicine, pediatrics, and obstetrician/gynecologists), social workers, and psychologists were geocoded to latitude and longitude coordinates. Distances were calculated; those < 0.01 miles apart were considered colocated. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted, and maps were generated. RESULTS: Of the 380,690 PCPs, > 44% were colocated with a behavioral health provider. PCPs in urban settings were significantly more likely to be colocated than rural providers (46% vs. 26%). Family medicine and general practitioners were least likely to be colocated. Only 12% of PCPs who were the sole PCP at an address were colocated compared with 48% at medium-size practices (11-25 PCPs). DISCUSSION: Although colocation is modestly expanding in the United States, it is most often occurring in large urban health centers. Efforts to expand integrated behavioral health care should focus on rural and smaller practices, which may require greater assistance achieving integration. Increased colocation can improve access to behavioral health care for rural, underserved populations. This work provides a baseline to assist policymakers and practices reach behavioral health integration. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Where are social workers co-located with primary care physicians?

Social workers are increasingly working in primary care clinics that provide Integrated Behavioral Healthcare (IBH) in which a patient's physical, behavioral, and social determinants of health are addressed on a collaborative team. Co-location, where care is housed in the same physical space, is a key element of IBH. Yet, little is known about the rate of social workers co-located with primary care physicians (PCPs). To identify national rates of social worker co-location, data were drawn from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES; n = 232,021 social workers, n = 380,690 PCPs). Practice addresses were geocoded and straight-line distances between practice locations of social workers and PCPs were calculated. More than 26% of social workers were co-located with a PCP. However, in rural settings only 21% were co-located (p < .001). Co-location also varied by PCP practice size, specialty, and state. This study serves as a benchmark of the growth of IBH and continued monitoring of co-location is needed to ensure social work workforce planning and training are aligned with changing models of care. Further, identifying mechanisms to support social work education, current providers, and health systems to increase IBH implementation is greatly needed.

Social workers in integrated health care: Improving care throughout the life course.

Great strides have been made in highlighting the strengths of the social work profession as a workforce vital to improving the health and well-being of individuals, families, and communities. Nevertheless, substantially more work is needed to advance education, practice, and research involving social workers' potential and their contributions to improved care throughout the life course. This special issue offers exemplars of the power of social work in integrated settings with the capacity to address the scope of behavioral health, psychosocial, and physical health care needs. In today's rapidly evolving heath care context, integrated care represents a promising direction for the future of health services, and may be leveraged to improve population health across the life course. Papers selected for this special issue focused on two themes: (a) defining the expanding roles and functions social workers fulfill in integrated health settings, and (b) identifying organizational and system factors that affect social workers' delivery of interventions in integrated health models. This special issue further articulates the added-value of social workers on health care teams and the resulting improved outcomes for patients, families, and communities. Through increased evidence, such as the knowledge gained from this special issue, it is our hope that the profession continues to advance the boundary-spanning roles and capabilities of social workers in integrated health settings-both in the hospital and in community-based settings.