Peer-Led Self-Management of General Medical Conditions for Patients With Serious Mental Illnesses: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with serious mental illnesses have high rates of general medical comorbidity and challenges in managing these conditions. A growing workforce of certified peer specialists is available to help these individuals more effectively manage their health and health care. However, few studies have examined the effectiveness of peer-led programs for self-management of general medical conditions for this population. METHODS: This randomized study enrolled 400 participants with a serious mental illness and one or more chronic general medical conditions across three community mental health clinics. Participants were randomly assigned to the Health and Recovery Peer (HARP) program, a self-management program for general medical conditions led by certified peer specialists (N=198), or to usual care (N=202). Assessments were conducted at baseline and three and six months. RESULTS: At six months, participants in the intervention group demonstrated a significant differential improvement in the primary study outcome, health-related quality of life. Specifically, compared with the usual care group, intervention participants had greater improvement in the Short-Form Health Survey physical component summary (an increase of 2.7 versus 1.4 points, p=.046) and mental component summary (4.6 versus 2.5 points, p=.039). Significantly greater six-month improvements in mental health recovery were seen for the intervention group (p=.02), but no other between-group differences in secondary outcome measures were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The HARP program was associated with improved physical health- and mental health-related quality of life among individuals with serious mental illness and comorbid general medical conditions, suggesting the potential benefits of more widespread dissemination of peer-led disease self-management in this population.

Randomized Trial of an Integrated Behavioral Health Home: The Health Outcomes Management and Evaluation (HOME) Study.

OBJECTIVE: Behavioral health homes provide primary care health services to patients with serious mental illness treated in community mental health settings. The objective of this study was to compare quality and outcomes of care between an integrated behavioral health home and usual care. METHOD: The study was a randomized trial of a behavioral health home developed as a partnership between a community mental health center and a Federally Qualified Health Center. A total of 447 patients with a serious mental illness and one or more cardiometabolic risk factors were randomly assigned to either the behavioral health home or usual care for 12 months. Participants in the behavioral health home received integrated medical care on-site from a nurse practitioner and a full-time nurse care manager subcontracted through the health center. RESULTS: Compared with usual care, the behavioral health home was associated with significant improvements in quality of cardiometabolic care, concordance of treatment with the chronic care model, and use of preventive services. For most cardiometabolic and general medical outcomes, both groups demonstrated improvement, although there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups over time. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that it is possible, even under challenging real-world conditions, to improve quality of care for patients with serious mental illness and cardiovascular risk factors. Improving quality of medical care may be necessary, but not sufficient, to improve the full range of medical outcomes in this vulnerable population.