Establishing Measurement-based Care in Integrated Primary Care: Monitoring Clinical Outcomes Over Time

Building Capacity of Community Health Centers to Improve the Provision of Postpartum Care Services Through Data-Driven Health Information Technology and Innovation

Maternal morbidity and mortality remain significant challenges in the United States, with substantial burden during the postpartum period. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in partnership with the National Association of Community Health Centers, began an initiative to build capacity in Federally Qualified Health Centers to (1) improve the infrastructure for perinatal care measures and (2) use perinatal care measures to identify and address gaps in postpartum care. Two partner health center-controlled networks implemented strategies to integrate evidence-based recommendations into the clinic workflow and used data-driven health information technology (HIT) systems to improve data standardization for quality improvement of postpartum care services. Ten measures were created to capture recommended care and services. To support measure capture, a data cleaning algorithm was created to prioritize defining pregnancy episodes and delivery dates and address data inconsistencies. Quality improvement activities targeted postpartum care delivery tailored to patients and care teams. Data limitations, including inconsistencies in electronic health record documentation and data extraction practices, underscored the complexity of integrating HIT solutions into postpartum care workflows. Despite challenges, the project demonstrated continuous quality improvement to support data quality for perinatal care measures. Future solutions emphasize the need for standardized data elements, collaborative care team engagement, and iterative HIT implementation strategies to enhance perinatal care quality. Our findings highlight the potential of HIT-driven interventions to improve postpartum care within health centers, with a focus on the importance of addressing data interoperability and documentation challenges to optimize and monitor initiatives to improve postpartum health outcomes.

Brief modular anxiety intervention for primary care: Hybrid I pilot randomized controlled trial of feasibility, acceptability, effectiveness, and implementation potential

BACKGROUND

Anxiety is highly prevalent, but undertreated, in primary care. Brief, non-pharmacological interventions are needed. Modular Anxiety Skills Training (MAST), a cognitive-behavioral anxiety intervention, was developed for primary care and tailored for a Veteran sample (MAST-V). The purpose of this mixed methods pilot study was to evaluate MAST-V's feasibility, acceptability, and implementation potential, and preliminarily examine its effectiveness compared to Primary Care Behavioral Health (PCBH) usual care.

METHODS

This hybrid I randomized controlled trial (conducted 2019-2021) assigned 35 primary care patients (Mage = 47, 17 % female, 27 % racial/ethnic minority) with clinically significant anxiety symptoms to receive MAST-V or PCBH usual care. Participants completed validated measures of anxiety symptoms and functional impairment at 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks.

RESULTS

Participants attended more sessions in MAST-V than usual care. After necessary adjustments to reduce session duration, MAST-V will likely fit within PCBH practice parameters. Participants in both conditions valued treatment, but treatment satisfaction, credibility, and therapeutic alliance were higher for MAST-V. Study therapists achieved high treatment fidelity and rated MAST-V as highly feasible, acceptable, and appropriate for PCBH. They identified ways to address potential barriers to implementation. MAST-V was more effective than usual care in reducing anxiety symptoms and impairment.

LIMITATIONS

This was a small pilot study at a single site using study therapists. Results should be considered preliminary until replicated in a full-scale clinical trial.

CONCLUSIONS

This brief modular anxiety intervention, which was designed with implementation in mind, may help to address the anxiety treatment gap in primary care.

Community-guided measurement-based care for autistic youth and adults receiving psychotherapy: A conceptual overview and pilot implementation study of MBC-AUT

LAY ABSTRACT

Autistic youth and adults are more likely to experience psychiatric symptoms (e.g. depression, anxiety) and to use psychiatric services than non-autistic people, yet research on evidence-based approaches to enhance psychiatric care for autistic people is limited. Measurement-based care is an evidence-based approach to psychotherapy that improves outcomes for clients, clinicians, and organizations by routinely administering and evaluating measures to clients. Despite this, research on measurement-based care systems for autistic clients is sparse. To address this gap, we developed an autism-adapted measurement-based care (MBC-AUT) system for and with autistic people and pilot tested the system in an outpatient psychiatry clinic to investigate the preliminary feasibility, acceptability, benefits, and barriers to this system for clients and clinicians. Findings suggested that the MBC-AUT system was a feasible and acceptable system for the first 18 autistic youth, their caregivers, and autistic adults to use the system. In semi-structured interviews, clients and clinicians discussed the benefits of the MBC-AUT system to various therapeutic processes, as well as several important barriers to the use of the system. We offer potential solutions to address these barriers and to reduce client and clinician burden, and propose future directions for this line of research to increase access to more autistic people. As autistic clients continue to seek psychological services amid social landscapes of increasing complexity (e.g. COVID-19 pandemic), efforts to enhance the delivery of psychotherapy for this population are critical.

Goal setting and monitoring with alcohol and other drug use disorders: Principles and practices

INTRODUCTION

This work builds on a small body of literature that explores core processes in psychotherapy, behavior change, and evidence-based alcohol or other drug (AOD) therapies. Here, this paper discusses two separate but dependent processes. The research team defines goal setting and goal monitoring as collaborative processes where clinicians and clients identify and formulate therapeutic goals; actionable objectives; and revisit, measure, and renegotiate these plans via a standardized procedure over time.

METHOD

Study methods included a literature review and qualitative content analysis to derive a set of principles and practices of goal setting and monitoring. The research team used source documents (i.e., literature reviews, therapy manuals, and government-issued practice guidelines) and videos (i.e., therapy demonstration videos), and we performed analyses in NVIVO.

RESULTS

The study identified ten principles and 32 practices. The principles suggest that goal setting and monitoring can be characterized as a collaborative, explicit, and standardized approach to engaging in goal-directed therapeutic work. The term goal-directed therapeutic work connotes a shift toward a more accountable frame for care than has been previously emphasized in the literature. The identified practices were organized into five sub-themes related to goal setting (10 practices), goal monitoring (10 practices), as well as practices specific to mechanisms of goal pursuit and behavior change. These practices involved ways to attend to client self-determination (4 practices), motivation (4 practices), and self-efficacy (4 practices).

CONCLUSIONS

Goal setting and monitoring are a collaborative means of mapping and tracking a course of mutually accountable treatment. The current work is a novel resource for trainees, clinicians, and clinical supervisors interested in care based on evidence-based principles and practices of AOD and other behavior change therapies.

The Development of a Brief Version of the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI-3) in Older Adult Veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Objective/Background: The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) is an insomnia self-report measure used to identify individuals at risk for insomnia disorder. Although the full ISI is only seven questions, a briefer version would allow more efficient and pragmatic administration in routine practice settings. Reliable and valid brief measures can support measurement-based care. The present study was a proof-of-concept study that developed a brief version of the ISI, the ISI-3, in a sample of older adult veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a group which is at increased risk for insomnia.Patients/Methods: Participants included 86 older veterans with combat- or military-related PTSD. Veterans completed a clinician-administered PTSD diagnostic interview, self-report measures of insomnia and other psychosocial questionnaires, and two neuropsychological assessments. The factor structure of the ISI was examined to reduce the measure into a brief version. The reliability and validity of the ISI-3 were examined.Results: Principal axis factoring yielded a one-factor solution, which reproduced 59% of the item variance. Item reduction procedures resulted in three items, which best represented this factor ("Insomnia Impact;" ISI-3). For the ISI-3, internal consistency was good (α =.89). Convergent validity was demonstrated via moderate to high positive correlations between the ISI-3 and other measures of sleep disturbance. Divergent validity was demonstrated via non-significant correlations between the ISI-3 and unrelated measures and moderate correlations with self-reported depression.Conclusions: The ISI-3 is a psychometrically valid brief version of the ISI. Clinicians can administer the ISI-3 to screen for insomnia and monitor changes in insomnia during treatment.

Suicide Risk Management Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Cardiac Patients Reporting Hopelessness

BACKGROUND

Investigators conducting studies that include potentially suicidal individuals are obligated to develop a suicide risk management (SRM) protocol. There is little available in the literature to guide researchers in SRM protocol development.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to describe an SRM protocol developed for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) currently enrolling cardiac patients who report moderate to severe levels of hopelessness.

METHODS

The SRM protocol identifies suicidal ideation and measures ideation severity through use of the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale risk factor questions. Based on responses, study participants are deemed safe or at low, moderate, or high risk for suicide. The SRM protocol guides research staff through a plan of action based on risk level. The protocol further guides staff through a plan over the course of this prospective study-from hospital enrollment to home-based visits.

RESULTS

Research staff are well trained to identify suicidal ideation risk factors, initiate specific questioning about suicidal intent, determine level of risk, identify protective factors and a safe environment, and make referrals if needed. Of the 51 patients hospitalized with cardiac disease who reported moderate to severe hopelessness, 43 scored at a safe suicide risk level and 8 scored at low risk. Thirty-five of the 51 patients enrolled in the RCT. Of the 35 participants who received home visits to date, there have been three instances of low and one instance of moderate suicide risk. The SRM protocol has been consistently and accurately used by research personnel in both hospital and home settings. One modification has been made to the protocol since study activation, namely, the addition of an assessment of counseling history and encouragement of continued counseling. Booster training sessions of research staff will continue throughout the course of the RCT.

DISCUSSION

Use of the SRM protocol identifies study participants who are safe or at risk for suicide in both hospital and home settings, and research staff can refer participants accordingly.

CONCLUSION

The SRM protocol developed for this RCT can serve as a model in the development of SRM protocols for future research in acute care, community, or home-based settings.

Discussing measurement-based care with patients: An analysis of clinician-patient dyads

Abstract Measurement-based care (MBC) refers to the use of three integrated strategies to improve effectiveness of behavioral health care: routine outcomes monitoring using symptom measures; regularly sharing these data with patients; and using these data to inform treatment decisions. This study examined how clinicians discuss MBC data with patients, including identifying what aspects of these discussions contribute to clinician-patient agreement on the value of MBC, and how clinicians use MBC data to inform treatment decisions. Twenty-six clinician-patient dyads participated in semi-structured interviews and provided a treatment session recording in which MBC data were discussed. Qualitative data analyses revealed four subtypes of dyads: clinician and patient both valued MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient passively participated in MBC; clinician valued MBC, patient had mixed perceptions of MBC; clinician and patient reported moderate or low value for MBC. In dyads for whom both the clinician and patient valued MBC, the clinician provided clear and repeated rationale for MBC, discussed data with patients at every administration, and connected observed scores to patient skills or strategies. Emerging best practices for discussing MBC include providing a strong rationale, discussing results frequently, actively engaging patients in discussions, and using graphs to visualize progress.

A qualitative evaluation of Veterans Health Administration's implementation of measurement-based care in behavioral health

Measurement-based care (MBC) in behavioral health involves the repeated collection of patient-reported data that is used to track progress, inform care, and engage patients in shared decision making about their treatment. Research suggests that MBC increases the quality and effectiveness of mental health care. However, there can be challenges to implementing MBC, such as time burden, lack of resources to support MBC, and clinician attitudes. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is currently undertaking a multiphase MBC roll-out, the first phase of which included 59 sites across the country. The present study examined implementation of this initiative in an effort to learn more about the process of implementation, including best practices, challenges, and innovations. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 MBC site champions and 60 staff members from 25 VHA medical centers across the country. Qualitative data analysis was conducted to identify key themes related to MBC implementation. Results were described for 3 components of MBC implementation: preparing for implementation, administering measures, and using and sharing data. Training and staff buy-in were key to the preparation phase. Staff members reported a variety of methods and frequencies for the collection of MBC data, with many staff members identifying a need to streamline the collection process. Staff members reported using data to track progress and adjust treatment with patients. Efforts to use data on a programmatic level were identified as a next step. Innovative solutions across clinics and sites are described in an effort to inform future MBC implementation, both within and outside of VHA. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

A Method for Tracking Implementation Strategies: An Exemplar Implementing Measurement-Based Care in Community Behavioral Health Clinics

Implementation experts suggest tailoring strategies to the intended context may enhance outcomes. However, it remains unclear which strategies are best suited to address specific barriers to implementation, in part because few measurement methods exist that adhere to recommendations for reporting. In the context of a dynamic cluster randomized trial comparing a standardized to tailored approach to implementing measurement-based care (MBC), this study aimed to (a) describe a method for tracking implementation strategies, (b) demonstrate the method by tracking strategies generated by teams tasked with implementing MBC at their clinics in the tailored condition, and (c) conduct preliminary examinations of the relation between strategy use and implementation outcomes (i.e., self-reported fidelity to MBC). The method consisted of a coding form based on Proctor, Powell, and McMillen (2013) implementation strategy reporting guidelines and Powell et al.'s (2012) taxonomy to facilitate specification of the strategies. A trained research specialist coded digitally recorded implementation team meetings. The method allowed for the following characterization of strategy use. Each site generated 39 unique strategies across an average of six meetings in five months. There was little variability in the use of types of implementation strategies across sites with the following order of prevalence: quality management (50.00%), restructuring (16.53%), communication (15.68%), education (8.90%), planning (7.20%), and financing (1.69%). We identified a new category of strategies not captured by the existing taxonomy, labeled "communication." There was no evidence that number of implementation strategies enacted was statistically significantly associated with changes in self-reported fidelity to MBC-however, financing strategies were associated with increased fidelity. This method has the capacity to yield rich data that will inform investigations into tailored implementation approaches.

Quality Improvement in Health Care: The Role of Psychologists and Psychology

Quality Improvement (QI) is a health care interprofessional team activity wherein psychology as a field and individual psychologists in health care settings can and should adopt a more robust presence. The current article makes the argument for why psychology's participation in QI is good for health care, is good for our profession, and is the right thing to do for the patients and families we serve. It reviews the varied ways individual psychologists and our profession can integrate quality processes and improve health care through: (1) our approach to our daily work; (2) our roles on health care teams and involvement in organizational initiatives; (3) opportunities for teaching and scholarship; and (4) system redesign and advocacy within our health care organizations and health care environment.

Mental health measurement among women veterans receiving co-located, collaborative care services

Routine use of measurement to identify patient concerns and track treatment progress is critical to high quality patient care. This is particularly relevant to the Primary Care Behavioral Health model, where rapid symptom assessment and effective referral management are critical to sustaining population-based care. However, research suggests that women who receive treatment in co-located collaborative care settings utilizing the PCBH model are less likely to be assessed with standard measures than men in these settings. The current study utilized regional retrospective data obtained from the Veterans Health Administration's electronic medical record system to: (1) explore rates of mental health measurement for women receiving co-located collaborative care services (N = 1008); and (2) to identify predictors of mental health measurement in women veterans in these settings. Overall, only 8% of women had documentation of standard mental health measures. Measurement was predicted by diagnosis, facility size, length of care episode and care setting. Specifically, women diagnosed with depression were less likely than those with anxiety disorders to have standard mental health measurement documented. Several suggestions are offered to increase the quality of mental health care for women through regular use of measurement in integrated care settings.