Improving Care for Late-Life Depression Through Partnerships With Community-Based Organizations: Results From the Care Partners Project.

OBJECTIVES: Collaborative care (CC) has demonstrated effectiveness for improving late-life depression in primary care, but clinics offering this service can find it challenging to address unmet social needs that may be contributing to their patients' depression. Clinics may benefit from better coordination and communication with community-based organizations (CBO) to strengthen depression treatment and to address unmet social needs. We evaluated the feasibility of adding a CBO to enhance standard collaborative care and the impact of such partnered care on older adults. DESIGN: Multisite, prepost evaluation. SETTING: Eight (n = 8) partnerships between primary care clinics and community-based organizations in California. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 707 depressed older adults (60 years or older) as evidenced by having a score of 10 or more on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) received care under the Care Partners project. INTERVENTION: A CBO partner was added to augment CC for late-life depression in primary care. MEASUREMENTS: The PHQ-9 was used to identify depressed older adults and to monitor depression symptom severity during a course of care. RESULTS: At baseline, the average PHQ-9 depression score across the partnerships was 15, indicating moderate depression severity. Participating patients saw an average 7-point reduction in their PHQ-9 score, baseline to last score assessed, with nearly half of all participants (48.4%) experiencing a 50% or greater improvement from their baseline score. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that partnering with a community-based organization is a feasible and effective way for primary care clinics to address late-life depression in their patients.

The Effectiveness of the Case Manager-Centered Collaborative Care Model with Computer-Assisted Assessment on Quality Indicators for the Care of Dementia.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate the influence of case management and its corresponding computer-assisted assessment system on the quality improvement of dementia care. METHODS: This observational study enrolled 2029 patients and their caregivers at Changhua Christian Hospital in Taiwan. Physicians who made the diagnosis of dementia would introduce the patient and caregiver dyad to the case manager-centered collaborative care team after obtaining agreement. The achievement rates of 11 quality indicators (QIs) comprising timely diagnostic evaluations, regular screens of cognition and neuropsychiatric symptoms, caregiver support, and proper medication prescriptions were counted. Different timeframes (≤4 months, 4 months-1 year, 1-2 years, 2-3 years, or ≥3 years) from diagnosis of dementia to collaborative care intervention were compared. RESULTS: A significantly higher attainment rate was achieved for patients with earlier entry into the collaborative team model, including QIs about timely diagnosis and regular screening, and caregiver support. The QIs regarding dementia medication prescriptions and documentation of the risk of antipsychotics remained similar regardless of the time of entry into the model. The completion rates of QIs also improved after the information system was launched. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-case manager co-management in the setting of a collaborative care model with a computer-assisted assessment system helps improve QI achievement for dementia care.

Improving patient-centered care for HIV and mental illness: exploring hospital and community integration through education.

Current models of care delivery are failing patients with complexity, like those living with HIV, mental illness and other psychosocial challenges. These patients often require resource-intensive personalized care across hospital and community settings, but available supports can be fragmented and challenging to access and navigate. To improve this, the authors created a program to enhance integrated, trauma-informed care through an innovative educational role for a HIV community caseworker embedded in an academic HIV Psychiatry clinic, called the Mental Health Clinical Fellowship. Through qualitative interviews with 21 participants (patients, physicians, clinicians and Mental Health Clinical Fellows) from October 2020-March 2023, the authors explore how implementation of this program affects patient experiences and satisfaction with care. Patients described their care experiences as less stigmatizing, more accessible, holistic and coordinated. They often attributed this to the integration between fellow and psychiatrist, and specifically the accessible stance of community organizations embedded within a hospital, which helped build trust. Interchangeable and integrated support by caseworker and psychiatrist improved patient engagement in psychiatric management and patient satisfaction with their care. Cross-context and cross-disciplinary care provision that includes providers from community and hospital working directly together to deliver care can improve care for patients with significant complexity.

Health economic evaluation of blended collaborative care for older multimorbid heart failure patients: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Integrated care, in particular the 'Blended Collaborative Care (BCC)' strategy, may have the potential to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in multimorbid patients with heart failure (HF) and psychosocial burden at no or low additional cost. The ESCAPE trial is a randomised controlled trial for the evaluation of a BCC approach in five European countries. For the economic evaluation of alongside this trial, the four main objectives were: (i) to document the costs of delivering the intervention, (ii) to assess the running costs across study sites, (iii) to evaluate short-term cost-effectiveness and cost-utility compared to providers' usual care, and (iv) to examine the budgetary implications. METHODS: The trial-based economic analyses will include cross-country cost-effectiveness and cost-utility assessments from a payer perspective. The cost-utility analysis will calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ-5D-5L and national value sets. Cost-effectiveness will include the cost per hospital admission avoided and the cost per depression-free days (DFD). Resource use will be measured from different sources, including electronic medical health records, standardised questionnaires, patient receipts and a care manager survey. Uncertainty will be addressed using bootstrapping. DISCUSSION: The various methods and approaches used for data acquisition should provide insights into the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of a BCC intervention. Providing the economic evaluation of ESCAPE will contribute to a country-based structural and organisational planning of BCC (e.g., the number of patients that may benefit, how many care managers are needed). Improved care is expected to enhance health-related quality of life at little or no extra cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study follows CHEERS2022 and is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00025120).

A systematic review and meta-analysis of pediatric integrated primary care for the prevention and treatment of physical and behavioral health conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of behavioral health interventions delivered within pediatric integrated primary care models on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS for studies published from January 1, 1998, to September 20, 2023. We included studies that evaluated onsite behavioral health integration in pediatric primary care using a comparator condition (usual, enhanced usual care, or waitlist). Outcome data on symptom change, impairment/quality of life, health indicator, and behavior change were extracted using Covidence software. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed Risk of bias analysis was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We used multilevel meta-analysis to synthesize multiple outcomes nested within studies. Open Science Foundation pre-registration: #10.17605/OSF.IO/WV7XP. RESULTS: In total, 33 papers representing 27 studies involving 6,879 children and caregivers were included. Twenty-four studies were randomized controlled trials and three were quasi-experimental designs. Seventeen papers reported on treatment trials and 16 reported on prevention trials. We found a small overall effect size (SMD = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [0.11, 0.27]) supporting the superiority of integrated primary care to usual or enhanced usual care. Moderator analyses suggested similar effectiveness between co-located and integrated models and no statistically significant differences were found between treatment and prevention trials. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that integrated primary care is superior to usual and enhanced usual care at improving behavior, quality of life, and symptoms. Integrated primary care research needs improved standards for reporting to promote better synthesis and understanding of the literature.

Integrated Care in Neurology: The Current Landscape and Future Directions.

The rising burden of neurological disorders poses significant challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. There has been an increasing momentum to apply integrated approaches to the management of several chronic illnesses in order to address systemic healthcare challenges and improve the quality of care for patients. The aim of this paper is to provide a narrative review of the current landscape of integrated care in neurology. We identified a growing body of research from countries around the world applying a variety of integrated care models to the treatment of common neurological conditions. Based on our findings, we discuss opportunities for further study in this area. Finally, we discuss the future of integrated care in Canada, including unique geographic, historical, and economic considerations, and the role that integrated care may play in addressing challenges we face in our current healthcare system.

Multilevel perspectives on the implementation of the collaborative care model for depression and anxiety in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based mental health treatment in primary care. A greater understanding of the determinants of successful CoCM implementation, particularly the characteristics of multi-level implementers, is needed. METHODS: This study was a process evaluation of the Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) study (NCT04321876) in which CoCM was implemented in 11 primary care practices. CBHP implementation included screening for depression and anxiety, referral to CBHP, and treatment with behavioral care managers (BCMs). Interviews were conducted 4- and 15-months post-implementation with BCMs, practice managers, and practice champions (primary care clinicians). We used framework-guided rapid qualitative analysis with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Version 2.0, focused on the Individuals domain, to analyze response data. These data represented the roles of Mid-Level Leaders (practice managers), Implementation Team Members (clinicians, support staff), Innovation Deliverers (BCMs), and Innovation Recipients (primary care/CBHP patients) and their characteristics (i.e., Need, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation). RESULTS: Mid-level leaders (practice managers) were enthusiastic about CBHP (Motivation), appreciated integrating mental health services into primary care (Need), and had time to assist clinicians (Opportunity). Although CBHP lessened the burden for implementation team members (clinicians, staff; Need), some were hesitant to reallocate patient care (Motivation). Innovation deliverers (BCMs) were eager to deliver CBHP (Motivation) and confident in assisting patients (Capability); their opportunity to deliver CBHP could be limited by clinician referrals (Opportunity). Although CBHP alleviated barriers for innovation recipients (patients; Need), it was difficult to secure services for those with severe conditions (Capability) and certain insurance types (Opportunity). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, respondents favored sustaining CoCM and highlighted the positive impacts on the practice, health care team, and patients. Participants emphasized the benefits of integrating mental health services into primary care and how CBHP lessened the burden on clinicians while providing patients with comprehensive care. Barriers to CBHP implementation included ensuring appropriate patient referrals, providing treatment for patients with higher-level needs, and incentivizing clinician engagement. Future CoCM implementation should include strategies focused on education and training, encouraging clinician buy-in, and preparing referral paths for patients with more severe conditions or diverse needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04321876). Registered: March 25,2020. Retrospectively registered.

Barriers and facilitators to collaborative care implementation within the New York State Collaborative Care Medicaid Program.

BACKGROUND: Since 2015, the New York State Office of Mental Health has provided state primary care clinics with outreach, free training and technical assistance, and the opportunity to bill Medicaid for the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) as part of its Collaborative Care Medicaid Program. This study aims to describe the characteristics of New York State primary care clinics at each step of CoCM implementation, and the barriers and facilitators to CoCM implementation for the New York State Collaborative Care Medicaid Program. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, clinics were categorized into RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) steps. Clinics were sent a survey, which included questions related to payer mix, funding sources, billing codes used, and patient population demographics. Qualitative interviews were conducted with clinic representatives, focusing on barriers or facilitators clinics experienced affecting their progression to the next RE-AIM step. RESULTS: One thousand ninety-nine surveys were sent to primary care clinics across New York State, with 107 (9.7%) completing a survey. Significant differences were observed among the different RE-AIM steps for multiple demographic variables including primary payer, percentage of patients with a diagnose of depression or anxiety, and percent of behavioral health services that are reimbursed, in addition to others. Three main themes regarding barriers and facilitators to implementing CoCM for New York State Medicaid billing emerged from 31 qualitative interviews: (1) Billing requirements, (2) Reimbursement rates, and (3) Buy-in to CoCM. CONCLUSIONS: Survey data align with what we would expect to see demographically in NYS primary care clinics. Qualitative data indicated that CoCM billing requirements/structure and reimbursement rates were perceived as barriers to providing CoCM, particularly with New York State Medicaid, and that buy-in, which included active involvement from organizational leaders and providers that understand the Collaborative Care model were facilitators. Having dedicated staff to manage billing and data reporting is one way clinics minimize barriers, however, there appeared to be a disconnect between what clinics can bill for and the reimbursed amount several clinics are receiving, illustrating the need for stronger billing workflows and continued refinement of billing options across different payers.

Quality indicators for collaborative care networks in persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders: a modified delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Care for persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) is often fragmented. Collaborative care networks (CCNs) may improve care quality for PSS/FD. Effectiveness likely depends on their functioning, but we lack a straightforward quality evaluation system. We therefore aimed to develop quality indicators to evaluate CCNs for PSS/FD. METHOD: Using an online three-round modified Delphi process, an expert panel provided, selected and ranked quality indicators for CCNs in PSS/FD. Recruited experts were diverse healthcare professionals with relevant experience in PSS/FD care in the Netherlands. RESULTS: The expert panel consisted of 86 professionals representing 15 disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists and medical specialists. 58% had more than 10 years experience in PSS/FD care. Round one resulted in 994 quotations, which resulted in 46 unique quality indicators. These were prioritised in round two and ranked in round three by the panel, resulting in a final top ten. The top three indicators were: "shared vision of care for PSS/FD", "pathways tailored to the individual patient", and "sufficiently-experienced caregivers for PSS/FD". CONCLUSIONS: The identified quality indicators to evaluate CCNs in the field of PSS/FD can be implemented in clinical practice and may be useful in improving services and when assessing effectiveness.

Reducing economic burden through split-shared care model for people living with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and polypharmacy: a multi-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional collaborative care such as a split-shared care model involving family physicians and community pharmacists can reduce the economic burden of diabetes management. This study aimed to evaluate the economic outcome of a split-shared care model between family physicians and community pharmacists within a pharmacy chain in managing people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and polypharmacy. METHOD: This was a multi-center, parallel arm, open label, randomized controlled trial comparing the direct and indirect economic outcomes of people who received collaborative care involving community pharmacists (intervention) versus those who received usual care without community pharmacist involvement (control). People with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, defined as HbA1c > 7.0% and taking ≥ 5 chronic medications were included while people with missing baseline economic data (such as consultation costs, medication costs) were excluded. Direct medical costs were extracted from the institution's financial database while indirect costs were calculated from self-reported gross income and productivity loss, using Work Productivity Activity Impairment Global Health questionnaire. Separate generalized linear models with log link function and gamma distribution were used to analyze changes in direct and indirect medical costs. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients (intervention = 70, control = 105) completed the trial and were included for analysis. The mean age of the participants was 66.9 (9.2) years, with majority being male and Chinese. The direct medical costs were significantly lower in the intervention than the control group over 6 months (intervention: -US$70.51, control: -US$47.66, p < 0.001). Medication cost was the main driver in both groups. There were no significant changes in productivity loss and indirect costs in both groups. CONCLUSION: Implementation of split-shared visits with frontline community partners may reduce economic burden for patient with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes and polypharmacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Reference Number: NCT03531944 (Date of registration: June 6, 2018).

Mental Health Collaborative Care in Brazil and the Economy of Attention: Disclosing Barriers and Therapeutic Negotiations.

The introduction of mental health collaborative care (MHCC) is one of the strategies to scale up access to mental health care in primary health care in Brazil. This article investigates an experience of mental health collaborative care in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. It is a qualitative study involving interviews with physicians and mental health professionals working in primary health care units located in the northern part of the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The aim is to examine the various strategies and negotiations that primary health care professionals deploy to identify mental distress and plan health care interventions. We discuss the results within the economy of attention framework. We argue that divergences in diagnostic design and therapeutic planning carried out by professionals and users or observed in MHCC meetings illustrate the health-disease-care seeking phenomenon as a negotiated process, entangled in complex interactions. Our results evince that those interactions are not always evident and configure 'what is at stake' in mental suffering. The incorporation of cultural and structural determinants in collaborative care may enable the expansion of mental health initiatives sensitive to local needs and realities.

Predictors of Symptom Reduction and Remission Among People with Anxiety: Secondary Analyses from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Despite the substantial disease burden of anxiety disorders, only limited or conflicting data on prognostic factors is available. Most studies include patients in the secondary healthcare sector thus, the generalizability of findings is limited. The present study examines predictors of symptom reduction and remission in patients with anxiety disorders in a primary care setting. 214 patients with anxiety disorders, recruited as part of the Collabri Flex trial, were included in secondary analyses. Data on potential predictors of anxiety symptoms at 6-month follow-up was collected at baseline, including patient characteristics related to demography, illness, comorbidity, functional level, life quality, and self-efficacy. The outcomes were symptom reduction and remission. Univariate and multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the associations between predictor variables and the outcome, and machine-learning methods were also applied. In multiple linear regression analysis, anxiety severity at baseline (ß = -6.05, 95% CI = -7.54,-4.56, p < 0.001) and general psychological problems and symptoms of psychopathology (SCL-90-R score) (ß = 2.19, 95% CI = 0.24,4.14, p = 0.028) were significantly associated with symptom change at 6 months. Moreover, self-efficacy was associated with the outcome, however no longer significant in the multiple regression model. In multiple logistic regression analysis, anxiety severity at baseline (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = -1.13,-0.12, p = 0.018) was significantly associated with remission at 6 months. There was no predictive performance of the machine-learning models. Our study contributes with information that could be valuable knowledge for managing anxiety disorders in primary care.

Considerations for Psychological Debriefing in the Context of Prolonged Disaster Response.

First responders face greater exposure to potentially traumatic events compared with the general public, which can lead to an increased likelihood of developing mental health concerns. The challenges of disaster relief take a physical and mental toll on first responders. Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD), the widely accepted gold-standard treatment for psychological debriefing, is often applied to offset this toll among first responders. CISD is a manualized seven-stage group intervention that was developed to provide support and aid in coping and to allow individuals who respond to emergencies and disasters to continue working. Substantial evidence has been found for its effectiveness. However, there is a general dearth of evidence about the field of prolonged disaster response, and research is hampered by the difficulties of executing a controlled study in the context of an emergency scenario.

Implementation Barriers and Experiences of Eligible Patients Who Failed to Enroll in Collaborative Care for Depression and Anxiety.

BACKGROUND: Effective and efficient implementation of the Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) for depression and anxiety is imperative for program success. Studies examining barriers to implementation often omit patient perspectives. OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences and attitudes of eligible patients referred to CoCM who declined participation or were unable to be reached, and identify implementation barriers to inform strategies. DESIGN: Convergent mixed-methods study with a survey and interview. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care patients at an academic medical center who were referred to a CoCM program for anxiety and depression by their primary care clinician (PCC) but declined participation or were unable to be reached by the behavioral health care manager to initiate care (n = 80). Interviews were conducted with 45 survey respondents. MAIN MEASURES: Survey of patients' referral experiences and behavioral health preferences as they related to failing to enroll in the program. Interview questions were developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research version 2.0 (CFIR 2.0) to identify implementation barriers to enrollment. KEY RESULTS: Survey results found that patients were uncertain about insurance coverage, did not understand the program, and felt services were not necessary. Referred patients who declined participation were concerned about how their mental health information would be used and preferred treatment without medication. Men agreed more that they did not need services. Qualitative results exhibited a variety of implementation determinants (n = 23) across the five CFIR 2.0 domains. Barriers included mental health stigma, perceiving behavioral health as outside of primary care practice guidelines, short or infrequent primary care appointments, prioritizing physical health over mental health, receiving inaccurate program information, low motivation to engage, and a less established relationship with their PCC. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple barriers to enrollment led to failing to link patients to care, which can inform implementation strategies to address the patient-reported experiences and concerns.

Collaborative Care Models to Improve Pain and Reduce Opioid Use in Primary Care: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care management (CCM) is an empirically driven model to overcome fractured medical care and improve health outcomes. While CCM has been applied across numerous conditions, it remains underused for chronic pain and opioid use. Our objective was to establish the state of the science for CCM approaches to addressing pain-related outcomes and opioid-related behaviors through a systematic review. METHODS: We identified peer-reviewed articles from Cochrane, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed databases from January 1, 1995, to October 31, 2022. Abstracts and full-text articles were screened for study inclusion, resulting in 18 studies for the final review. In addition, authors used the Patient-Centered Integrated Behavioral Health Care Principles and Tasks Checklist as a tool for assessing the reported CCM components within and across studies. We conducted this systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement. RESULTS: Several CCM trials evidenced statistically significant improvements in pain-related outcomes (n = 11), such as pain severity and pain-related activity interference. However, effect sizes varied considerably across studies and some effects were not clinically meaningful. CCM had some success in targeting opioid-related behaviors (n = 4), including reduction in opioid prescription dose. Other opioid-related work focused on CCM to facilitate buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (n = 2), including improved odds of receiving treatment and greater prevalence of abstinence from opioids and alcohol. Uniquely, several interventions used CCM to target mental health as a way to address pain (n = 10). Generally, there was moderate alignment with the CCM model. CONCLUSIONS: CCM shows promise for improving pain-related outcomes, as well as facilitating buprenorphine for opioid use disorder. More robust research is needed to determine which aspects of CCM best support improved outcomes and how to maximize the effectiveness of such interventions.

Long-term Effects of a Collaborative Care Model on Metabolic Outcomes and Depressive Symptoms: 36-Month Outcomes from the INDEPENDENT Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care (CC) is a multicomponent team-based approach to providing mental health care with systematic integration into outpatient medical settings. The 12-month INDEPENDENT CC intervention improved joint disease control measures in patients with both depression and diabetes at 12 and 24 months following randomization. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the durability of intervention effects on patient outcomes at 36 months following randomization. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with poorly controlled T2D and depression in India randomized to CC or usual care. DESIGN: Post hoc analyses of between-group differences in patient outcomes at 36 months post-randomization (N = 331) and maintenance of outcomes from 12 to 36 months (N = 314). MAIN MEASURES: We evaluated combined risk factor improvement since baseline, defined as ≥ 50.0% reduction in Symptom Checklist Depression Scale (SCL-20) scores along with reduction of at least 0.5 percentage point hemoglobin A1C, 5 mmHg systolic blood pressure, or 10 mg/dL low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Improvements in single risk factors were also examined. KEY RESULTS: There were no between-group differences in improvements since baseline in multiple or single risk factors at 36 months. Patients in the CC group with improved outcomes at 12 months were more likely to maintain a ≥ 50.0% reduction since baseline in SCL-20 scores (CC [54.9%] vs. UC [40.9%]; RR: 1.27 [95% CI: 1.04, 1.56]) and 0.5 percentage point reduction since baseline in hemoglobin A1C (CC [31.9%] vs. UC [19.5%]; RR: 1.64 [95% CI: 1.11, 2.41]) at 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: While improvements since baseline in patient outcomes did not differ between the collaborative care and usual care groups at 36 months, patients who received CC were more likely to maintain improvements in depressive symptoms and glucose levels at 36 months if they had achieved these improvements at the end of active intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02022111.

Integration of Health Coaches in a Whole Health Team Model of Chronic Pain Care: a Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Health coaching has shown promise in helping patients manage their chronic disease and in improving health outcomes, yet the implementation of health coaching in healthcare systems is understudied. Further, evidence suggests that interdisciplinary care teams may be more effective in treating chronic pain than usual care. As such, we sought to examine the benefits and drawbacks to embedding health coaches within interdisciplinary pain care teams ("Whole Health Teams"). DESIGN: As part of a multisite clinical trial (at five Veterans Health Administration sites) investigating the effectiveness of a Whole Health Team (WHT) approach to care for patients with chronic pain, qualitative interviews gathered data on how the experience of treating patients in the WHT differed from the experience treating patients outside the WHT, as well as provider experiences coordinating patient care within the WHT. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-two WHT members, study investigators, and study coordinators. APPROACH: Data were analyzed using a rapid analysis approach. RESULTS: Overall, stakeholders perceived considerable synergy within the interdisciplinary pain care team. Each provider brought a different perspective to the patient's health concerns, which stakeholders felt was valuable and increased patient progress towards goals. The team model was also viewed as efficient because everyone was committed to working together and communicating as a team. Logistically, however, stakeholders noted challenges to working as a team, especially regarding patient goal setting. Furthermore, multiple stakeholders believed the care team model required a high degree of dedication to teamwork and communication among its members to be successful. CONCLUSIONS: Embedding health coaches within interdisciplinary pain care teams may improve care processes and accelerate patient progress. Successful implementation would require adequate training, role clarification, and expectation setting to facilitate good communication across all care team members. Additional research is needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of integrating health coaches on WHTs versus other implementation approaches.

Effect of modernized collaborative care for depression on depressive symptoms and cardiovascular disease risk biomarkers: eIMPACT randomized controlled trial.

Although depression is a risk and prognostic factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), clinical trials treating depression in patients with CVD have not demonstrated cardiovascular benefits. We proposed a novel explanation for the null results for CVD-related outcomes: the late timing of depression treatment in the natural history of CVD. Our objective was to determine whether successful depression treatment before, versus after, clinical CVD onset reduces CVD risk in depression. We conducted a single-center, parallel-group, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial. Primary care patients with depression and elevated CVD risk from a safety net healthcare system (N = 216, Mage = 59 years, 78% female, 50% Black, 46% with income <$10,000/year) were randomized to 12 months of the eIMPACT intervention (modernized collaborative care involving internet cognitive-behavioral therapy [CBT], telephonic CBT, and/or select antidepressants) or usual primary care for depression (primary care providers supported by embedded behavioral health clinicians and psychiatrists). Outcomes were depressive symptoms and CVD risk biomarkers at 12 months. Intervention participants, versus usual care participants, exhibited moderate-to-large (Hedges' g = -0.65, p < 0.01) improvements in depressive symptoms. Clinical response data yielded similar results - 43% of intervention participants, versus 17% of usual care participants, had a ≥ 50% reduction in depressive symptoms (OR = 3.73, 95% CI: 1.93-7.21, p < 0.01). However, no treatment group differences were observed for the CVD risk biomarkers - i.e., brachial flow-mediated dilation, high-frequency heart rate variability, interleukin-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ß-thromboglobulin, and platelet factor 4 (Hedges' gs = -0.23 to 0.02, ps ≥ 0.09). Our modernized collaborative care intervention - which harnessed technology to maximize access and minimize resources - produced clinically meaningful improvements in depressive symptoms. However, successful depression treatment did not lower CVD risk biomarkers. Our findings indicate that depression treatment alone may not be sufficient to reduce the excess CVD risk of people with depression and that alternative approaches are needed. In addition, our effective intervention highlights the utility of eHealth interventions and centralized, remote treatment delivery in safety net clinical settings and could inform contemporary integrated care approaches. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02458690.

Responding to distress in cancer care: Increasing access to psycho oncology services through integrated collaborative care.

OBJECTIVE: Despite increased attention to the utility of collaborative care models for promoting whole-person care in cancer populations, there is a paucity of empirical research testing the impact of these care models on effectively identifying and serving highly distressed cancer patients. This study sought to experimentally test the effectiveness of a year-long collaborative care program on referral rates to psycho-oncology services for patients with moderate to high distress. METHODS: Data for this study consisted of 11,467 adult patients with cancer who were screened for psychosocial distress 6-months prior to, and following, the integrated collaborative care intervention. Psychosocial referral rates pre-, peri- and post- intervention were analyzed. RESULTS: Findings indicated high distress patients were at 3.76 (95% CI [2.40, 5.87]), 5.03 (95% CI [3.25, 7.76]), and 7.62 (95% CI [5.34, 10.87]) times increased odds of being referred during the pre-intervention, peri-intervention, and post-intervention, respectively, when compared to low distress patients, and these differences across time were significantly different (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Findings from this study suggest that the successful initiation of a collaborative care model within a comprehensive cancer center contributed to significantly greater referral rates of cancer patients with moderate to high distress to psycho-oncology services. This study contributes to the growing consensus that collaborative care models can positively impact the care of complex medical patients.

Integrated Care for Complicated Patients: A Role for Combined Training and Practice.

Patients with chronic medical disease frequently have comorbid psychiatric illness, yet mental and physical healthcare is frequently siloed in the United States. Integrated behavioral healthcare models, such as medicine-psychiatry services, are feasible, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs. The Duke University Hospital medicine-psychiatry service provides holistic patient care and serves as a model for those interested in developing combined services or training programs elsewhere. Combined residency training in psychiatry is a way to provide a workforce of physician-scientist educators adept at providing coordinated, integrated care for complex patients with comorbid illness.