Mission Alliance Community Engagement Project: Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 on Social Isolation, Loneliness, Mental Health and Wellbeing in Veterans.

During the Coronavirus disease pandemic, many U.S. veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) experienced increased symptomology and worsened mental health and well-being due in part to social isolation and loneliness. The Mission Alliance project explored these ramifications and prioritized critical issues expressed by U.S. veterans and stakeholders (N = 182) during virtual regional meetings (N = 32). Field notes created specifically for this project were recorded and thematically analyzed. Emerging themes included: (1) social isolation: missed opportunities, collapsed social circles, work-life balance, fostering relationships, and evolving health care delivery; (2) loneliness: deteriorated mental health, suffered with PTSD together but alone, looked out for each other, ambivalence toward technology, and strained and broken systems; (3) mental health: sense of chaos, increased demand and decreased access, aggravation, implementation of tools, innovative solutions, fear and loss, and availability of resources; (4) wellbeing: sense of purpose, holistic perspective on well-being, recognition of balance, persisting stigma, redefined pressures, freedom to direct treatment, and reconnection and disconnection. A PTSD-related patient centered outcomes research (PCOR)/comparative effectiveness research (CER) agenda was developed from these themes. Establishment of a veteran and stakeholder network is suggested to support, facilitate, and promote the PTSD-related PCOR/CER agenda. Furthermore, enhancement of opportunities for veterans with PTSD and stakeholders to partner in PCOR/CER is required to develop and conduct projects that lead to PTSD-related comprehensive care of veterans affected by traumatic events with the potential to translate findings to other populations.

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Two Telemedicine Approaches for Treating Patients with Mental Health Disorders in Underserved Areas.

BACKGROUND: Primary care practices in underserved and/or rural areas have limited access to mental health specialty resources for their patients. Telemedicine can help address this issue, but little is known about how patients and clinicians experience telemental health care. METHODS: This pragmatic randomized effectiveness trial compared telepsychiatry collaborative care, where telepsychiatrists provided consultation to primary care teams, to a referral approach, where telepsychiatrists and telepsychologists assumed responsibility for treatment. Twelve Federally Qualified Health Centers in rural and/or underserved areas in 3 states participated. RESULTS: Patients and clinicians reported that both interventions alleviated barriers to accessing mental health care, provided quality treatment, and offered improvements over usual care. Telepsychiatry collaborative care was identified as better for patients with difficulty developing trust with new providers. This approach also required more primary care involvement than referral care, creating more opportunities for clinician learning related to mental health diagnosis and treatment. The referral approach was identified as better suited for patients with higher complexity or desiring specific psychotherapies. CONCLUSIONS: Both approaches addressed patient needs and provided access to specialty mental health care. Each approach better aligned with different patients' needs, suggesting that having both approaches available to practices is optimal for supporting patient-centered care.

Comparison of Teleintegrated Care and Telereferral Care for Treating Complex Psychiatric Disorders in Primary Care: A Pragmatic Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Importance: Only one-third of patients with complex psychiatric disorders engage in specialty mental health care, and only one-tenth receive adequate treatment in primary care. Scalable approaches are critically needed to improve access to effective mental health treatments in underserved primary care settings. Objective: To compare 2 clinic-to-clinic interactive video approaches to delivering evidence-based mental health treatments to patients in primary care clinics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial used a sequential, multiple-assignment, randomized trial (SMART) design with patient-level randomization. Adult patients treated at 24 primary care clinics without on-site psychiatrists or psychologists from 12 federally qualified health centers in 3 states who screened positive for posttraumatic stress disorder and/or bipolar disorder and who were not already receiving pharmacotherapy from a mental health specialist were recruited from November 16, 2016, to June 30, 2019, and observed for 12 months. Interventions: Two approaches were compared: (1) telepsychiatry/telepsychology-enhanced referral (TER), where telepsychiatrists and telepsychologists assumed responsibility for treatment, and (2) telepsychiatry collaborative care (TCC), where telepsychiatrists provided consultation to the primary care team. TER included an adaptive intervention (phone-enhanced referral [PER]) for patients not engaging in treatment, which involved telephone outreach and motivational interviewing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions assessed patient-reported outcomes. The Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey Mental Component Summary (MCS) score was the primary outcome (range, 0-100). Secondary outcomes included posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, manic symptoms, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, recovery, and adverse effects. Results: Of 1004 included participants, 701 of 1000 (70.1%) were female, 660 of 994 (66.4%) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 39.4 (12.9) years. Baseline MCS scores were 2 SDs below the US mean; the mean (SD) MCS scores were 39.7 (14.1) and 41.2 (14.2) in the TCC and TER groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in 12-month MCS score between those receiving TCC and TER (ß = 1.0; 95% CI, -0.8 to 2.8; P = .28). Patients in both groups experienced large and clinically meaningful improvements from baseline to 12 months (TCC: Cohen d = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95; TER: Cohen d = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.04). For patients not engaging in TER at 6 months, there was no significant difference in 12-month MCS score between those receiving PER and TER (ß = 2.0; 95% CI, -1.7 to 5.7; P = .29). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness trial of patients with complex psychiatric disorders randomized to receive TCC or TER, significantly and substantially improved outcomes were observed in both groups. From a health care system perspective, clinical leadership should implement whichever approach is most sustainable. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02738944.