Rapid Community Translation in the Colorado CEAL (CO-CEAL) Program: Transcreating Messaging to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination.

Providing communities with COVID-19 vaccination information is essential for optimizing equitable vaccine uptake. Using rapid community translation, adapted from Boot Camp Translation, five community teams transcreated COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. Transcreated messaging incorporated community attitudes, culture, and experiences. Using rapid community translation for the promotion of COVID-19 vaccination demonstrates a successful approach to engaging communities most affected by the pandemic to develop messages that reflect community values, assets, and needs, especially when time is of the essence. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S1):S50-S54. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307456).

Behavioral health integration and specialty medical care: Opportunities for applying knowledge from primary care integration.

While education and advocacy regarding behavioral health (BH) integration in primary care have been in full force at the state and national level for many years, specialty care BH integration has not received the same attention in terms of practice transformation, workforce development, and payment reform. Models of BH care have been tested in primary care and can be easily adapted to improve specialty patient care. There are many opportunities for using the knowledge base gained from integrated primary care to help move integration forward in the specialty medical setting. The timing for this is rife, as the benefits of integrated BH for patient health outcomes are well established. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Policy pathways to address American youth firearm injury and death.

Context: The burden of firearm violence and death are uniquely American problems. Over 90% of firearm deaths among children and adolescents in high income countries occur in the United States. Despite similar overall crime rates, the gun homicide rate is about 25 times higher in the U.S. than other Western democracies, and 49 times higher for those aged 15-24 years. Firearm-related injuries are a leading cause of child and adolescent deaths, second only to motor vehicle crashes. Approximately 4.6 million children are living in U.S. homes with at least one loaded, unlocked firearm. Reducing gun violence injuries and deaths is imperative and requires a multifaceted approach. Objectives: Review the impact of gun violence on youth across the U.S.; articulate the evidence base for gun safety policies; describe the current landscape of federal and state firearm laws. Study Design: Policy analysis and literature review. Results: The history of U.S. firearm policy demonstrates laws in evolution from 1791-2021, regulating both gun owner rights and restrictions. These firearm policies, existing in a variety of forms in states and nationally, reveal evidence that gun safety legislation saves lives: Child Access Prevention; Safe Storage; Universal Background Checks; Permit to Purchase; Extended Waiting Periods; Extreme Risk Protection Orders; Assault Weapon and High Capacity Magazine Ban. The dearth of federal law has resulted in more extensive state legislation but with variability and inconsistencies. No single law or policy reduces all forms of gun violence, but states with a variety of firearm policies have a cumulative impact on reducing injuries and death. Conclusions: We aim to promote education, physical safety, and behavioral health so that children can achieve their highest potential. Decreasing firearm injury and death is achievable with education, collaboration, research, and policies. To protect children and youth from firearm injury and death, we must: strengthen federal laws building on evidence from state policies; protect current evidence-based state laws from dismantling efforts; invest in public health firearms research; overcome the inequities suffered by disproportionately affected populations.

UPSTREAM! Together evaluation results from community efforts to prevent mental, emotional, and behavioral health problems.

Mental, emotional, and behavioral (MEB) health problems are prevalent globally. Despite effective programs that can prevent MEB problems and promote mental health, there has not been widespread adoption. UPSTREAM! Together was a planning project in three Colorado communities. Communities partnered with academic and policy entities to 1) translate evidence about MEB problem prevention into locally-relevant messages and materials and 2) develop long-term plans for broad implementation of interventions to prevent high-priority MEB problems. Community members recognized the need to talk about MEB problems to prevent them. The UPSTREAM! communities localized messages designed to start conversations and sustain attention on preventing MEB problems. The communities understood that prevention takes sustained community attention and advocacy, knowing that important outcomes may be years away. Long-term implementation plans aimed to strengthen families and enhance social connections among youth. Despite community readiness and capacity to implement evidence-based programs, there were few funding opportunities, delaying program implementation and revealing gaps between funding policies and community readiness. This community-engaged experience suggests an achievable approach, acceptable to communities, and worthy of further development and testing. Policies that cultivate and support local expertise may help to increase wider community adoption of evidence-based programs that promote mental health among youth.

Assessing cross-sector stakeholder readiness to advance and sustain statewide behavioral integration beyond a State Innovation Model (SIM) initiative.

Integrated care is recognized as a promising approach to comprehensive health care and reductions in health care costs. However, the integration of behavioral health and primary care is complex and often difficult to implement. Successful and sustainable integration efforts require coordination and alignment both within health care organizations and across multiple sectors. Furthermore, implementation progress and outcomes are shaped by the readiness of stakeholders to work together toward integrated care. In the context of a Colorado State Innovation Model (SIM) effort, we examined stakeholder readiness to advance and sustain partnerships for behavioral health integration beyond the period of grant funding. Partnership readiness was assessed using the Readiness for Cross-sector Partnerships Questionnaire (RCP) in spring 2019. Participants from 67 organizations represented seven sectors: government, health care, academic, practice transformation, advocacy, payer, and other. RCP analyses indicated a moderate level of readiness among Colorado stakeholders for partnering to continue the work of behavioral health integration initiated by SIM. Stakeholders indicated their highest readiness levels for general capacity and lowest for innovation-specific capacity. Five thematic categories emerged from the open-ended questions pertaining to partnership experiences: (a) collaboration and relationships, (b) capacity and leadership, (c) measurement and outcomes, (d) financing integrated care, and (e) sustainability of the cross-sector partnership. Partnering across sectors to advance integrated behavioral health and create more equitable access to services is inherently complex and nonlinear in nature. The RCP usefully identifies opportunities to strengthen the sustainability of integrated care efforts.

Integrating behavioral health and primary care: a qualitative analysis of financial barriers and solutions.

The objective of this study was to characterize financial barriers and solutions for the integration of behavioral health in primary care at the practice and system levels. Semi-structured interviews were conducted March-August of 2015 with 77 key informants. Initially a broad thematic coding approach was used, and data coded as "financing" was further analyzed in ATLAS.ti using an inductive thematic approach by three coders. Themes identified included the following: fragmentation of payment and inadequate investment limit movement toward integration; the evidence base for integration is not well known and requires appropriately structured further study; fee-for-service limits the movement to integration-an alternative payment system is needed; there are financial considerations beyond specific models of payment, including incentivizing innovation, prevention, and practice transformation support; stakeholders need to be engaged and aligned to support this process. There was consensus that the current fragmented, fee-for-service system with inadequate baseline reimbursement significantly hinders progression toward integrated behavioral health and primary care. Funding is needed both to support integrated care and to facilitate the transition to a new model. Multiple suggestions were offered regarding interim solutions to move toward an integrated model and ultimately global payment. Payment, in terms of both adequate amount and model, is a significant obstacle to integrating behavioral health and primary care. Future policy efforts must focus on ensuring stakeholder collaboration, multi-payer alignment, increasing investment in behavioral health and primary care, and moving away from fee-for-service toward a global and value-based payment model.

Clinical Workflows and the Associated Tasks and Behaviors to Support Delivery of Integrated Behavioral Health and Primary Care.

Integrating primary care and behavioral health is an important focus of health system transformation. Cross-case comparative analysis of 19 practices in the United States describing integrated care clinical workflows. Surveys, observation visits, and key informant interviews analyzed using immersion-crystallization. Staff performed tasks and behaviors-guided by protocols or scripts-to support 4 workflow phases: (1) identifying; (2) engaging/transitioning; (3) providing treatment; and (4) monitoring/adjusting care. Shared electronic health records and accessible staffing/scheduling facilitated workflows. Stakeholders should consider these workflow phases, address structural features, and utilize a developmental approach as they operationalize integrated care delivery.

Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care.

Financially supporting and sustaining behavioral health services integrated into primary care settings remains a major barrier to widespread implementation. Sustaining Healthcare Across Integrated Primary Care Efforts (SHAPE) was a demonstration project designed to prospectively examine the cost savings associated with utilizing an alternative payment methodology to support behavioral health services in primary care practices with integrated behavioral health services. Six primary care practices in Colorado participated in this project. Each practice had at least one on-site behavioral health clinician providing integrated behavioral health services. Three practices received non-fee-for-service payments (i.e., SHAPE payment) to support provision of behavioral health services for 18 months. Three practices did not receive the SHAPE payment and served as control practices for comparison purposes. Assignment to condition was nonrandom. Patient claims data were collected for 9 months before the start of the SHAPE demonstration project (pre-period) and for 18 months during the SHAPE project (post-period) to evaluate cost savings. During the 18-month post-period, analysis of the practices' claims data demonstrated that practices receiving the SHAPE payment generated approximately $1.08 million in net cost savings for their public payer population (i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, and Dual Eligible; N = 9,042). The cost savings were primarily achieved through reduction in downstream utilization (e.g., hospitalizations). The SHAPE demonstration project found that non-fee-for-service payments for behavioral health integrated into primary care may be associated with significant cost savings for public payers, which could have implications on future delivery and payment work in public programs (e.g., Medicaid).

Clinician Staffing, Scheduling, and Engagement Strategies Among Primary Care Practices Delivering Integrated Care.

PURPOSE: To examine the interrelationship among behavioral health clinician (BHC) staffing, scheduling, and a primary care practice's approach to delivering integrated care. METHODS: Observational cross-case comparative analysis of 17 primary care practices in the United States focused on implementation of integrated care. Practices varied in size, ownership, geographic location, and integrated care experience. A multidisciplinary team analyzed documents, practice surveys, field notes from observation visits, implementation diaries, and semistructured interviews using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Across the 17 practices, staffing ratios ranged from 1 BHC covering 0.3 to 36.5 primary care clinicians (PCCs). BHC scheduling varied from 50-minute prescheduled appointments to open, flexible schedules slotted in 15-minute increments. However, staffing and scheduling patterns generally clustered in 2 ways and enabled BHCs to be engaged by referral or warm handoff. Five practices predominantly used warm handoffs to engage BHCs and had higher BHC-to-PCC staffing ratios; multiple BHCs on staff; and shorter, more flexible BHC appointment schedules. Staffing and scheduling structures that enabled warm handoffs supported BHC engagement with patients concurrent with the identification of behavioral health needs. Twelve practices primarily used referrals to engage BHCs and had lower BHC-to-PCC staffing ratios and BHC schedules prefilled with visits. This enabled some BHCs to bill for services, but also made them less accessible to PCCs in when patients presented with behavioral health needs during a clinical encounter. Three of these practices were experimenting with open scheduling and briefer BHC visits to enable real-time access while managing resources. CONCLUSION: Practices' approaches to PCC-BHC staffing, scheduling, and delivery of integrated care mutually influenced each other and were shaped by the local context. Practice leaders, educators, clinicians, funders, researchers, and policy makers must consider these factors as they seek to optimize integrated systems of care.

Designing Clinical Space for the Delivery of Integrated Behavioral Health and Primary Care.

PURPOSE: This study sought to describe features of the physical space in which practices integrating primary care and behavioral health care work and to identify the arrangements that enable integration of care. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of 19 diverse practices located across the United States. Practice-level data included field notes from 2-4-day site visits, transcripts from semistructured interviews with clinicians and clinical staff, online implementation diary posts, and facility photographs. A multidisciplinary team used a 4-stage, systematic approach to analyze data and identify how physical layout enabled the work of integrated care teams. RESULTS: Two dominant spatial layouts emerged across practices: type-1 layouts were characterized by having primary care clinicians (PCCs) and behavioral health clinicians (BHCs) located in separate work areas, and type-2 layouts had BHCs and PCCs sharing work space. We describe these layouts and the influence they have on situational awareness, interprofessional "bumpability," and opportunities for on-the-fly communication. We observed BHCs and PCCs engaging in more face-to-face methods for coordinating integrated care for patients in type 2 layouts (41.5% of observed encounters vs 11.7%; P < .05). We show that practices needed to strike a balance between professional proximity and private work areas to accomplish job tasks. Private workspace was needed for focused work, to see patients, and for consults between clinicians and clinical staff. We describe the ways practices modified and built new space and provide 2 recommended layouts for practices integrating care based on study findings. CONCLUSION: Physical layout and positioning of professionals' workspace is an important consideration in practices implementing integrated care. Clinicians, researchers, and health-care administrators are encouraged to consider the role of professional proximity and private working space when creating new facilities or redesigning existing space to foster delivery of integrated behavioral health and primary care.

Not Near Enough: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Nearby Behavioral Health Care and Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Racial, ethnic, and geographical health disparities have been widely documented in the United States. However, little attention has been directed towards disparities associated with integrated behavioral health and primary care services. METHODS: Access to behavioral health professionals among primary care physicians was examined using multinomial logistic regression analyses with 2010 National Plan and Provider Enumeration System, American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, and American Community Survey data. RESULTS: Primary care providers practicing in neighborhoods with higher percentages of African Americans and Hispanics were less likely to have geographically proximate behavioral health professionals. Primary care providers in rural areas were less likely to have geographically proximate behavioral health professionals. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood-level factors are associated with access to nearby behavioral health and primary care. Additional behavioral health professionals are needed in racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods and rural areas to provide access to behavioral health services, and to progress toward more integrated primary care.

Study protocol for Women of Color and Asthma Control: a randomized controlled trial of an asthma-management intervention for African American women.

BACKGROUND: Among adults in the United States, asthma prevalence is disproportionately high among African American women; this group also experiences the highest levels of asthma-linked mortality and asthma-related health care utilization. Factors linked to biological sex (e.g., hormonal fluctuations), gender roles (e.g., exposure to certain triggers) and race (e.g., inadequate access to care) all contribute to the excess asthma burden in this group, and also shape the context within which African American women manage their condition. No prior interventions for improving asthma self-management have specifically targeted this vulnerable group of asthma patients. The current study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a culturally- and gender-relevant asthma-management intervention among African American women. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial will be used to compare a five-session asthma-management intervention with usual care. This intervention is delivered over the telephone by a trained health educator. Intervention content is informed by the principles of self-regulation for disease management, and all program activities and materials are designed to be responsive to the specific needs of African American women. We will recruit 420 female participants who self-identify as African American, and who have seen a clinician for persistent asthma in the last year. Half of these will receive the intervention. The primary outcomes, upon which the target sample size is based, are number of asthma-related emergency department visits and overnight hospitalizations in the last 12 months. We will also assess the effect of the intervention on asthma symptoms and asthma-related quality of life. Data will be collected via telephone survey and medical record review at baseline, and 12 and 24 months from baseline. DISCUSSION: We seek to decrease asthma-related health care utilization and improve asthma-related quality of life in African American women with asthma, by offering them a culturally- and gender-relevant program to enhance asthma management. The results of this study will provide important information about the feasibility and value of this program in helping to address persistent racial and gender disparities in asthma outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01117805.

Incidental myocardial infarction in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type IV?

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Type IV is an illness that often leads to premature death due to arterial rupture or dissection and is characterized by very fragile connective tissue. This report documents the death of a 30-year-old man with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Type IV from myocardial rupture and cardiac tamponade following a myocardial infarction. We believe that Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Type IV contributed to the coronary atherosclerosis and myocardial rupture in this young man and that this disease led indirectly to his death by myocardial infarction, an unusual cause of death in this syndrome.