Implementation of Behavioral Health Integration in Small Primary Care Settings: Lessons Learned and Future Directions.

Primary care practices are in great need of practical guidance on the steps they can take to build behavioral health integration (BHI) capacities, particularly for smaller practice settings with fewer resources. 11 small primary care sites (≤ 5 providers) throughout New York State utilized a continuum framework of core components of BHI in combination with technical assistance. Surveys were collected at baseline, 6-months, and 12-months. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted during site visits, and a stakeholder roundtable was facilitated to address broader themes. Data were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Practices reported successful engagement with the framework and actively participated in planning and advancing BHI operations. Greater success was observed in practices with existing on-site BHI services, identified champions for BHI, early and sustained training and involvement of providers and administrators, use of collaborative agreements with external behavioral health providers, and capacity to successfully receive reimbursements for BHI services. Advancing health information technologies was a challenge across sites. Financing and policy factors were viewed as critically important to advance integration efforts. The pilot of a continuum framework offers lessons for primary care practices and policymakers to advance integrated BH care.

A Continuum-Based Framework as a Practice Assessment Tool for Integration of General Health in Behavioral Health Care.

OBJECTIVE: General medical conditions among patients with mental and substance use disorders are often not adequately detected and managed in behavioral health settings. The project described in this study sought to investigate how behavioral health clinics used a new general health integration (GHI) framework to assess integration efforts. METHODS: Eleven community behavioral health clinics were introduced to a new continuum-based framework for use in GHI assessment. A multidisciplinary team in each clinic was tasked with identifying current GHI interventions according to several framework stages (preliminary, intermediate 1, intermediate 2, and advanced) among eight domains and 15 related subdomains. The clinics provided feedback on the framework's utility for GHI planning and advancement. RESULTS: The clinics could readily identify distinct integration interventions within each domain and subdomain. Clinics reported strengths in the domains of trauma-informed care, self-management support, social service linkages, and quality improvement. Opportunities for future advancement in integration of general health services were identified in the major domains of screening and referral, evidence-based treatments, care teams, and sustainability. The clinics also described potential benefits of the framework to further advance and implement GHI best practices. CONCLUSIONS: The clinics could use the framework as a practice assessment of integration efforts with minimal guidance and identify several evidence-based integration interventions. Some GHI interventions were seen as strengths and as opportunities for further advancement. Longitudinal evaluation among a larger number of and more geographically diverse behavioral health clinics seeking to advance their GHI practices will improve the GHI framework's generalizability and potential for dissemination.

A novel continuum-based framework for translating behavioral health integration to primary care settings.

Although evidence-based behavioral health integration models have been demonstrated to work well when implemented properly, primary care practices need practical guidance on the steps they can take to build behavioral health integration capacities. This is especially true for practice settings with fewer resources. This study is a pilot field test of a framework continuum composed of core components of behavioral health integration that can be used to translate the implementation of behavioral health into diverse clinical settings guided by a practice's priorities and available resources. This framework, in combination with technical assistance by the study team, was piloted in 11 small primary care sites (defined as ≤5 primary care providers) throughout New York State. Surveys were collected at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Informal check-in calls and site visits using qualitative semistructured individual and group interviews were conducted with 10 of the 11 sites. A mixed-methods approach was used to incorporate the survey data and qualitative thematic analysis. All practices advanced at least one level of behavioral health integration along various components of the framework. These advances included implementing depression screening, standardizing workflows for positive screens, integrating patient tracking tools for follow-up behavioral health visits, incorporating warm hand-offs to on-site or off-site behavioral health providers, and formalized external referrals using collaborative agreements. Practices reported they had overall positive experiences using the framework and offered feedback for how to improve future iterations. The framework continuum, in combination with technical assistance, was shown to be useful for primary care practices to advance integrated behavioral health care based on their priorities and resource availability. The results combined with feedback from the practices have yielded a revised "Framework 2.0" that includes a new organization as well as the addition of a "Sustainability" domain.