What are the barriers and facilitators to implementing Collaborative Care for depression? A systematic review

Factors associated with successful FLOW implementation to improve mental health access: a mixed-methods study

The FLOW program assists mental health providers in transitioning recovered and stabilized specialty mental health (SMH) patients to primary care to increase access to SMH care. In a recent cluster-randomized stepped-wedge trial, nine VA sites implemented the FLOW program with wide variation in implementation success. The goal of this study is to identify site-level factors associated with successful implementation of the FLOW program, guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used the Matrixed Multiple Case Study method, a mixed-methods approach, to compare key metrics hypothesized to impact implementation that were aligned with CFIR. Based upon the number of veterans transitioned at each site, we categorized two sites as higher implementation success, three as medium, and four as lower implementation success. Themes associated with more successful implementation included perceptions of the intervention itself (CFIR domain Innovation), having a culture of recovery-oriented care and prioritizing implementation over competing demands (CFIR domain Inner Setting), had lower mental health provider turnover, and had an internal facilitator who was well-positioned for FLOW implementation, such as having a leadership role or connections across several clinics (CFIR domain Characteristics of Individuals). Other variables, including staffing levels, leadership support, and organizational readiness to change did not have a consistent relationship to implementation success. These data may assist in identifying sites that are likely to need additional implementation support to succeed at implementing FLOW.

Planning for implementation success: insights from conducting an implementation needs assessment

AIM

The aim of this paper is to provide insights into conducting an implementation needs assessment using a case example in a less-research-intensive setting.

DESIGN AND METHODS

In the case example, an implementation needs assessment was conducted, including1 an environmental scan of the organization's website and preliminary discussions with key informants to learn about the implementation context, and2 a formal analysis of the evidence-practice gap (use of sedation interruptions) deploying a chart audit methodology using legal electronic reports.

RESULTS

Our needs assessment was conducted over 5 months and demonstrated how environmental scans reveal valuable information that can inform the evidence-practice gap analysis. A well-designed gap analysis, using suitable indicators of best practice, can reveal compliance rates with local protocol recommendations, even with a small sample size. In our case, compliance with the prescribed practices for sedation interruptions ranged from 65% (n=53) to as high as 84% (n=69).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation needs assessments provide valuable information that can inform implementation planning. Such assessments should include an environmental scan to understand the local context and identify both current recommended best practices and local best practices for the intervention of interest. When addressing an evidence-practice gap, analyses should quantify the difference between local practice and desired best practice.

IMPACT

The insights gained from the case example presented in this paper are likely transferrable to implementation research or studies conducted in similar, less-research-intensive settings.

SPANISH ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A257.

Towards collaborative care for severe and enduring Anorexia Nervosa - a mixed-method approach

BACKGROUND

Severe and Enduring Eating Disorders (SEED), in particular SEED-Anorexia Nervosa (SE-AN), may represent the most difficult disorder to treat in psychiatry. Furthermore, the lack of empirical research in this patient group, and, consequently the lack of guidelines, call for an urgent increase in research and discussion within this field. Meanwhile experts concur that effective care should be structured in a collaborative manner.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the challenges in providing care to patients with SE-AN in the Dutch healthcare context, and propose a collaborative care treatment model to address these issues.

METHODS

A pragmatic mixed-method approach was used, structured as follows: (1) Identifying perceived barriers and treatment needs from the viewpoint of both patients and eating disorder healthcare professionals through an evaluation questionnaire; (2) Investigating current treatment practices for SEED/SE-AN via benchmarking; (3) Gaining insight into the optimal structure and content of care by interviewing network partners and experts-by-experience. Based on these findings, and drawing from literature on severe and enduring disorders, a treatment model for SE-AN was proposed and implemented.

RESULTS

The key challenges identified included a lack of knowledge about eating disorders among network partners, treatment ambivalence among patients and poor collaboration between professionals. The proposed model enhances self-management and collaborative relationships with healthcare providers, offers user-friendly and practical guidance, and aims at stabilization, reducing relapses, deterioration, and readmissions, thereby being cost-effective. Importantly, the model operates across levels of care (primary, secondary, tertiary).

CONCLUSION

This study, describing a collaborative care program for SE-AN, developed and implemented in a highly specialized treatment center for eating disorders, sets the stage for further explanatory/efficacy research to build on the findings in this study, with the following aims: addressing the critical gap in care for SEED/SE-AN, improving better healthcare organization, reducing relapse rates, and lowering costs for this often overlooked patient group.

"I Felt Like I Mattered": Caring is a key ingredient of collaborative care for chronic illness

OBJECTIVES

To identify perceptions and experiences related to caring science and collaborative care in intervention participants of the Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness (CASA) study, a randomized, multi-site clinical trial for patients with chronic heart failure and reduced health status.

METHODS

Forty-five participants completed semi-structured, telephone interviews with a focus on intervention components, impact of the intervention on participants' lives, and recommendations for intervention change. Data were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach focusing on the presence and frequency of text to identify patterns, categories, and themes across participants without an a priori code book. The validity of the identified categories was enhanced through triangulation.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified: (1) intervention providers' caring/helping attitude and caring/helping communication; (2) care team availability to respond to concerns or questions; and (3) help with understanding and navigating the healthcare system.

DISCUSSION

Patients highly value caring attitudes and communication, availability, and empowerment to understand and navigate healthcare systems. These attitudes and behaviors may be important mediators of the success of collaborative care programs. These are consistent with the theory of caring science, a framework that is relevant more broadly to patient-centered and team-based care models.

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.

Strategies to improve implementation of collaborative care for functional disorders and persistent somatic symptoms: A qualitative study using a Research World Café design

INTRODUCTION

Persistent somatic symptoms and functional disorders (PSS/FD) are often complex conditions requiring care from multiple disciplines. One way of bringing the different disciplines together is through collaborative care. Little is known about the implementation barriers faced and relevant strategies to tackle the barriers in this field. Therefore, using expert knowledge, we aim to develop realistic strategies for dealing with implementation barriers of collaborative care in PSS/FD.

METHODS

The Research World Café method is a single-session, expert-based method with multiple focus-groups forming and reforming to answer a set of inter-related questions, under the guidance of moderators. Using this method, participants involved in PSS/FD care across different areas of healthcare in the Netherlands developed several realistic strategies for dealing with ten implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD that were previously identified in a Delphi study. Strategies were grouped into strategy clusters using a card-sorting task.

RESULTS

Thirty-three participants took part, representing ten different disciplines, most commonly physiotherapists, psychologists, and physicians. In total, 54 strategies, identified in response to the ten barriers, were grouped into eight strategy clusters. The strategy clusters were professional education, communication, care coordination, care pathways, joint consults, funding, patient involvement, and prevention.

CONCLUSION

We identified a number of useful strategies for dealing with implementation barriers for collaborative care in PSS/FD. Many strategies provided ways to deal with multiple barriers at once. The effects of applying these strategies in collaborative care in PSS/FD will need testing through implementation studies, as well as in other areas needing multidisciplinary care.

Translating evidence into practice in primary care management of adolescents and women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

The international guideline on polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) provides evidence-based recommendations on the management of PCOS. Guideline implementation tools (GItools) were developed for general practitioner (GP) use to aid rapid translation of guidelines into practice. This mixed-methods study aimed to evaluate barriers and enablers of the uptake of PCOS GItools in general practice.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional survey was distributed through professional networks and social media to GPs and GPs in training in Australia. Survey respondents were invited to contribute to semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative data were thematically analysed and mapped deductively to the Theoretical Domains Framework and Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour model.

RESULTS

The study engaged 146 GPs through surveys, supplemented by interviews with 14 participants. A key enabler to capability was reflective practice. Barriers relating to opportunity included limited awareness and difficulty locating and using GItools due to length and lack of integration into practice software, while enablers included ensuring recommendations were relevant to GP scope of practice. Enablers relevant to motivation included co-use with patients, and evidence of improved outcomes with the use of GItools.

DISCUSSION

This study highlights inherent barriers within the Australian healthcare system that hinder GPs from integrating evidence for PCOS. Findings will underpin behaviour change interventions to assist GPs in effectively utilising guidelines in clinical practice, therefore minimising variations in care. While our findings will have a direct influence on guideline translation initiatives, changes at organisational and policy levels are also needed to address identified barriers.

Something Happened with the Way We Work: Evaluating the Implementation of the Reducing Coercion in Norway (ReCoN) Intervention in Primary Mental Health Care

BACKGROUND

Current policies to reduce the use of involuntary admissions are largely oriented towards specialist mental health care and have had limited success. We co-created, with stakeholders in five Norwegian municipalities, the 'Reducing Coercion in Norway' (ReCoN) intervention that aims to reduce involuntary admissions by improving the way in which primary mental health services work and collaborate. The intervention was implemented in five municipalities and is being tested in a cluster randomized control trial, which is yet to be published. The present study evaluates the implementation process in the five intervention municipalities. To assess how the intervention was executed, we report on how its different elements were implemented, and what helped or hindered implementation.

METHODS

We assessed the process using qualitative methods. Data included detailed notes from quarterly progress interviews with (i) intervention coordinators and representatives from (ii) user organisations and (iii) carer organisations. Finally, an end-of-intervention evaluation seminar included participants from across the sites.

RESULTS

The majority of intervention actions were implemented. We believe this was enabled by the co-creating process, which ensured ownership and a good fit for the local setting. The analysis of facilitators and barriers showed a high degree of interconnectedness between different parts of the intervention so that success (or lack thereof) in one area affected the success in others. Future implementation should pay attention to enhanced planning and training, clarify the role and contribution of service user and carer involvement, and pay close attention to the need for implementation support and whether this should be external or internal to services.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to implement a complex intervention designed to reduce the use of involuntary admissions in general support services, such as the Norwegian primary mental health services. This could have implications for national and international policy aimed at reducing the use of involuntary care.

Core Components and Implementation Determinants of Multilevel Service Delivery Frameworks Across Child Mental Health Service Settings

Multilevel service delivery frameworks are approaches to structuring and organizing a spectrum of evidence-based services and supports, focused on assessment, prevention, and intervention designed for the local context. Exemplar frameworks in child mental health include positive behavioral interventions and supports in education, collaborative care in primary care, and systems of care in community mental health settings. Yet, their high-quality implementation has lagged. This work proposes a conceptual foundation for multilevel service delivery frameworks spanning diverse mental health service settings that can inform development of strategic implementation supports. We draw upon the existing literature for three exemplar multilevel service delivery frameworks in different child mental health service settings to (1) identify core components common to each framework, and (2) to highlight prominent implementation determinants that interface with each core component. Six interrelated components of multilevel service delivery frameworks were identified, including, (1) a systems-level approach, (2) data-driven problem solving and decision-making, (3) multiple levels of service intensity using evidence-based practices, (4) cross-linking service sectors, (5) multiple providers working together, including in teams, and (6) built-in implementation strategies that facilitate delivery of the overall model. Implementation determinants that interface with core components were identified at each contextual level. The conceptual foundation provided in this paper has the potential to facilitate cross-sector knowledge sharing, promote generalization across service settings, and provide direction for researchers, system leaders, and implementation intermediaries/practitioners working to strategically support the high-quality implementation of these frameworks.

Mental health integrated care models in primary care and factors that contribute to their effective implementation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

In the state of Victoria, Australia, the 111-day lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the population's prevailing state of poor mental health. Of the 87% of Australians who visit their GP annually, 71% of health problems they discussed related to psychological issues. This review had two objectives: (1) To describe models of mental health integrated care within primary care settings that demonstrated improved mental health outcomes that were transferable to Australian settings, and (2) To outline the factors that contributed to the effective implementation of these models into routine practice.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken to synthesise the evidence in order to inform practice, policymaking, and research. Data were obtained from PubMed, CINAHL and APA PsycINFO.

RESULTS

Key elements of effective mental health integrated care models in primary care are: Co-location of mental health and substance abuse services in the primary care setting, presence of licensed mental health clinicians, a case management approach to patient care, ongoing depression monitoring for up to 24 months and other miscellaneous elements. Key factors that contributed to the effective implementation of mental health integrated care in routine practice are the willingness to accept and promote system change, integrated physical and mental clinical records, the presence of a care manager, adequate staff training, a healthy organisational culture, regular supervision and support, a standardised workflow plan and care pathways that included clear role boundaries and the use of outcome measures. The need to develop sustainable funding mechanisms has also been emphasized.

CONCLUSION

Integrated mental health care models typically have a co-located mental health clinician who works closely with the GP and the rest of the primary care team. Implementing mental health integrated care models in Australia requires a 'whole of system' change. Lessons learned from the Mental Health Nurse Incentive Program could form the foundation on which this model is implemented in Australia.

Barriers and facilitators to the participation and engagement of primary care in shared-care arrangements with community mental health services for preventive care of people with serious mental illness: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

People with serious mental illness die about 20 years earlier than the general population from preventable diseases. Shared-care arrangements between general practitioners and mental health services can improve consumers' access to preventive care, but implementing shared care is challenging. This scoping review sought to describe current evidence on the barriers and facilitators to the participation and engagement of primary care (specifically general practitioners) in shared-care arrangements with community mental health services for preventive health care of this population.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, APA PsychINFO and EBM Reviews from 2010 to 2022. Data was extracted against a Microsoft Excel template developed for the review. Data was synthesised through tabulation and narrative methods.

RESULTS

We identified 295 records. After eligibility screening and full-text review, seven studies were included. Facilitators of engagement included a good fit with organisation and practice and opportunities to increase collaboration, specific roles to promote communication and coordination and help patients to navigate appointments, multidisciplinary teams and teamwork, and access to shared medical/health records. Barriers included a lack of willingness and motivation on the part of providers and low levels of confidence with tasks, lack of physical structures to produce capacity, poor alignment of funding/incentives, inability to share patient information and challenges engaging people with severe mental illness in the service and with their care.

CONCLUSION

Our results were consistent with other research on shared care and suggests that the broader literature is likely to be applicable to the context of general practitioner/mental health services shared care. Specific challenges relating to this cohort present difficulties for recruitment and retention in shared care programs. Sharing "goals and knowledge, mutual respect" and engaging in "frequent, timely, accurate, problem-solving communication", supported by structures such as shared information systems are likely to engage primary care in shared care arrangements more than the traditional focus on incentives, education, and guidelines.

Facilitators and barriers of routine psychosocial distress assessment within a stepped and collaborative care model in a Swiss hospital setting

BACKGROUND

Stepped and Collaborative Care Models (SCCMs) have shown potential for improving mental health care. Most SCCMs have been used in primary care settings. At the core of such models are initial psychosocial distress assessments commonly in form of patient screening. We aimed to assess the feasibility of such assessments in a general hospital setting in Switzerland.

METHODS

We conducted and analyzed eighteen semi-structured interviews with nurses and physicians involved in a recent introduction of a SCCM model in a hospital setting, as part of the SomPsyNet project in Basel-Stadt. Following an implementation research approach, we used the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework for analysis. The TICD distinguishes seven domains: guideline factors, individual healthcare professional factors, patient factors, professional interactions, incentives and resources, capacity for organizational change, and social, political, and legal factors. Domains were split into themes and subthemes, which were used for line-by-line coding.

RESULTS

Nurses and physicians reported factors belonging to all seven TICD domains. An appropriate integration of the psychosocial distress assessment into preexisting hospital processes and information technology systems was the most important facilitator. Subjectivity of the assessment, lack of awareness about the assessment, and time constraints, particularly among physicians, were factors undermining and limiting the implementation of the psychosocial distress assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness raising through regular training of new employees, feedback on performance and patient benefits, and working with champions and opinion leaders can likely support a successful implementation of routine psychosocial distress assessments. Additionally, aligning psychosocial distress assessments with workflows is essential to assure the sustainability of the procedure in a working context with commonly limited time.

Care coordination across healthcare systems: development of a research agenda, implications for practice, and recommendations for policy based on a modified Delphi panel

OBJECTIVE

For large, integrated healthcare delivery systems, coordinating patient care across delivery systems with providers external to the system presents challenges. We explored the domains and requirements for care coordination by professionals across healthcare systems and developed an agenda for research, practice and policy.

DESIGN

The modified Delphi approach convened a 2-day stakeholder panel with moderated virtual discussions, preceded and followed by online surveys.

SETTING

The work addresses care coordination across healthcare systems. We introduced common care scenarios and differentiated recommendations for a large (main) healthcare organisation and external healthcare professionals that contribute additional care.

PARTICIPANTS

The panel composition included health service providers, decision makers, patients and care community, and researchers. Discussions were informed by a rapid review of tested approaches to fostering collaboration, facilitating care coordination and improving communication across healthcare systems.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The study planned to formulate a research agenda, implications for practice and recommendations for policy.

RESULTS

For research recommendations, we found consensus for developing measures of shared care, exploring healthcare professionals' needs in different care scenarios and evaluating patient experiences. Agreed practice recommendations included educating external professionals about issues specific to the patients in the main healthcare system, educating professionals within the main healthcare system about the roles and responsibilities of all involved parties, and helping patients better understand the pros and cons of within-system and out-of-system care. Policy recommendations included supporting time for professionals with high overlap in patients to engage regularly and sustaining support for care coordination for high-need patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations from the stakeholder panel created an agenda to foster further research, practice and policy innovations in cross-system care coordination.

Barriers and enablers to implementing clinical practice guidelines in primary care: an overview of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

To identify the barriers and enablers to implementing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommendations in primary care and to provide recommendations that could facilitate the uptake of CPGs recommendations.

DESIGN

An overview of systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

Nine electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Journals @Ovid Full Text, EMBase, JBI) and three online data sources for guidelines (Turning Research Into Practice, the National Guideline Clearinghouse and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) were searched until May 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Systematic reviews, meta-analyses or other types of systematic synthesis of quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods studies on the topic of barriers and/or enablers for CPGs implementation in primary care were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently screened the studies and extracted the data using a predesigned data extraction form. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised by using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. Content analysis was used to synthesise the data.

RESULTS

Twelve systematic reviews were included. The methodological quality of the included reviews was generally robust. Six categories of barriers and enablers were identified, which include (1) political, social and culture factors, (2) institutional environment and resources factors, (3) guideline itself related factors, (4) healthcare provider-related factors, (5) patient-related factors and (6) behavioural regulation-related factors. The most commonly reported barriers within the above-mentioned categories were suboptimal healthcare networks and interprofessional communication pathways, time constraints, poor applicability of CPGs in real-world practice, lack of knowledge and skills, poor motivations and adherence, and inadequate reinforcement (eg, remuneration). Presence of technical support ('institutional environment and resources factors'), and timely education and training for both primary care providers (PCPs) ('healthcare provider-related factors') and patients ('patient-related factors') were the frequently reported enablers.

CONCLUSION

Policy-driven strategies should be developed to motivate different levels of implementation activities, which include optimising resources allocations, promoting integrated care models, establishing well-coordinated multidisciplinary networks, increasing technical support, encouraging PCPs and patients' engagement in guideline development, standardising the reporting of guidelines, increasing education and training, and stimulating PCPs and patients' motivations. All the activities should be conducted by fully considering the social, cultural and community contexts to ensure the success and sustainability of CPGs implementation.

Predicting Poor Outcomes Among Individuals Seeking Care for Major Depressive Disorder

Objective

To develop and validate algorithms to identify individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) at elevated risk for suicidality or for an acute care event.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among adults with MDD diagnosed between January 1, 2018 and February 28, 2019. Generalized estimating equation models were developed to predict emergency department (ED) visit, inpatient hospitalization, acute care visit (ED or inpatient), partial-day hospitalization, and suicidality in the year following diagnosis. Outcomes (per 1000 patients per month, PkPPM) were categorized as all-cause, psychiatric, or MDD-specific and combined into composite measures. Predictors included demographics, medical and pharmacy utilization, social determinants of health, and comorbid diagnoses as well as features indicative of clinically relevant changes in psychiatric health. Models were trained on data from 1.7M individuals, with sensitivity, positive predictive value, and area-under-the-curve (AUC) derived from a validation dataset of 0.7M.

Results

Event rates were 124.0 PkPPM (any outcome), 21.2 PkPPM (psychiatric utilization), and 7.6 PkPPM (suicidality). Among the composite models, the model predicting suicidality had the highest AUC (0.916) followed by any psychiatric acute care visit (0.891) and all-cause ED visit (0.790). Event-specific models all achieved an AUC >0.87, with the highest AUC noted for partial-day hospitalization (AUC = 0.938). Select predictors of all three outcomes included younger age, Medicaid insurance, past psychiatric ED visits, past suicidal ideation, and alcohol use disorder diagnoses, among others.

Conclusions

Analytical models derived from clinically-relevant features identify individuals with MDD at risk for poor outcomes and can be a practical tool for health care organizations to divert high-risk populations into comprehensive care models.

Increasing Uptake of Depression Screening and Treatment Guidelines in Cardiac Patients: A Behavioral and Implementation Science Approach to Developing a Theory-Informed, Multilevel Implementation Strategy

BACKGROUND

Depression leads to poor health outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Despite guidelines recommending screening and treatment of depressed patients with CHD, few patients receive optimal care. We applied behavioral and implementation science methods to (1) identify generalizable, multilevel barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD and (2) develop a theory-informed, multilevel implementation strategy for promoting guideline adoption.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD (ie, medications, exercise, cardiac rehabilitation, or therapy) comprising data from 748 study participants. Informed by the behavior change wheel framework and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change, we defined multilevel target behaviors, characterized determinants (capability, opportunity, motivation), and mapped barriers to feasible, acceptable, and equitable intervention functions and behavior change techniques to develop a multilevel implementation strategy, targeting health care systems/providers and patients.

RESULTS

We identified implementation barriers at the system/provider level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: workflow integration; Motivation: ownership) and patient level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: mobility; Motivation: symptom denial). Acceptable, feasible, and equitable intervention functions included education, persuasion, environmental restructuring, and enablement. Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies included learning collaborative, audit, feedback, and educational materials. The final multicomponent strategy (iHeart DepCare) for promoting depression screening/treatment included problem-solving meetings with clinic staff (system); educational/motivational videos, electronic health record reminders/decisional support (provider); and a shared decision-making (electronic shared decision-making) tool with several functions for patients, for example, patient activation, patient treatment selection support.

CONCLUSIONS

We applied implementation and behavioral science methods to identify implementation barriers and to develop a multilevel implementation strategy for increasing uptake of depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD as a use case. The multilevel implementation strategy will be evaluated in a future hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial.

A qualitative examination of the implementation of a perinatal collaborative care program

AIM

To identify implementation strategies for collaborative care (CC) that are successful in the context of perinatal care.

BACKGROUND

Perinatal depression is one of the most common complications of pregnancy and is associated with adverse maternal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes. Although treating depressive symptoms reduces risks to mom and baby, barriers to accessing psychiatric treatment remain. CC has demonstrated benefit in primary care, expanding access, yet few studies have examined the implementation of CC in perinatal care which presents unique characteristics and challenges.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews with 20 patients and 10 stakeholders from Collaborative Care Model for Perinatal Depression Support Services (COMPASS), a perinatal collaborative care (pCC) program implemented since 2017. We analyzed interview data by employing the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework to organize empirically selected implementation strategies from Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) to create a guide for the development of pCC programs.

FINDINGS

We identified 14 implementation strategies used in the implementation of COMPASS. Strategies were varied, cutting across ERIC domains (eg, plan, educate, finance) and across EPIS contexts (eg, inner context - characteristics of the pCC program). The majority of strategies were identified by patients and staff as facilitators of pCC implementation. In addition, findings show opportunities for improving the implementation strategies used, such as optimal dissemination of educational materials for obstetric clinicians. The implementation of COMPASS can serve as a model for the process of building a pCC program. The identified strategies can support the implementation of this evidence-based practice for addressing postpartum depression.

Primary Care Behavioral Health Integration and Care Utilization: Implications for Patient Outcome and Healthcare Resource Use

BACKGROUND

Behavioral health (BH) integration in primary care (PC) can potentially improve outcomes and reduce cost of care. While different models of integration exist, evidence from real-world examples is needed to demonstrate the effectiveness and value of integration. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of six PC practice sites located in Western New York that implemented a primary care behavioral health (PCBH) integration model.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of PCBH on all-cause healthcare utilization rates.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study based on historical multi-payer health insurance claims data. Claims data were aggregated on a per-member-per-month basis to compare utilization rates among the patients in the PC practice sites that had implemented PCBH to those in the sites that had not yet done so.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample included 6768 unique adult health plan members between October 2015 and June 2017 with at least one BH diagnosis code who were attributed to one of the six newly integrated PC practice sites.

INTERVENTIONS

Under the PCBH integration model, BH specialists were embedded in PC practice sites to treat a wide range of BH conditions.

MAIN MEASURES

Rates of all-cause ED visits and hospital admissions, along with rates of PC provider and BH provider visits.

KEY RESULTS

PCBH implementation was associated with reductions in the rates of outpatient ED visits (14.2%; p < 0.001) and PC provider visits (12.0%; p < 0.001), as well as with an increased rate of BH provider visits (7.5%; p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

PCBH integration appears to alter the treatment patterns among patients with BH conditions by shifting patient visits away from ED and PC providers toward BH providers who specialize in treatment of such patients.

Collaboration in the context of supporting people with mental health and addiction issues into employment: A scoping review

BACKGROUND: People with mental health and addiction issues have significantly lower levels of labor force participation than the general population. How organizations collaborate, particularly employment and health services, influence this disparity. Whilst collaboration has been examined, investigation of the role of collaboration context is limited. OBJECTIVE: To identify what affects collaboration to support people with mental health and addiction issues into employment. METHODS: A review and synthesis of the collaborative healthcare literature identified important a priori factors at macro, meso, and micro levels. A targeted scoping review of vocational rehabilitation literature identified the collaboration factors most relevant to supporting people with mental health and addiction issues into employment. RESULTS: Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria for the scoping review. Whilst some factors effecting collaboration aligned across these different contexts, there were notable differences. The vocational rehabilitation literature emphasized roles and responsibilities, contracting, training and technical assistance, sharing information, relationship continuity and practitioner value alignment. There was less emphasis in the vocational rehabilitation literature on practitioners’ beliefs about collaboration, how agencies work together around the person, and on infrastructure support. CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration in the context of supporting people with mental health and addiction issues into employment needs planning and support. Whilst many factors known to enable collaboration remain important, the collaboration context matters.

Barriers and facilitators of implementing interventions to improve appropriate antibiotic use in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

Background

Behavior change interventions that aim to improve rational antibiotic use in prescribers and users have been widely conducted in both high- and LMICs. However, currently, no review has systematically examined challenges unique to LMICs and offered insights into the underlying contextual factors that influence these interventions. We adopted an implementation research perspective to systematically synthesize the implementation barriers and facilitators in LMICs.

Methods

We conducted literature searches in five electronic databases and identified studies that involved the implementation of behavior change interventions to improve appropriate antibiotic use in prescribers and users in LMICs and reported implementation barriers and facilitators. Behavior change interventions were defined using the behavior change wheel, and the coding and synthesis of barriers and facilitators were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

We identified 52 eligible studies, with the majority targeting prescribers practicing at tertiary facilities (N=39, 75%). The most commonly reported factors influencing implementation were found in the inner setting domain of the CFIR framework, particularly related to constraints in resources and the infrastructure of the facilities where interventions were implemented. Barriers related to the external policy environment (e.g., lack of national initiatives and policies on antibiotic use), and individual characteristics of target populations (e.g., reluctance to change prescribing behaviors) were also common, as well as facilitators related to intervention characteristics (e.g., embedding interventions in routine practice) and process (e.g., stakeholder engagement). We also provided insights into the interrelationships between these factors and the underlying causes contributing to the implementation challenges in LMICs.

Conclusion

We presented a comprehensive overview of the barriers and facilitators of implementing behavior change interventions to promote rational antibiotic use in LMICs. Our findings suggest that facilitating the implementation of interventions to improve rational antibiotic use needs comprehensive efforts to address challenges at policy, organizational, and implementation levels. Specific strategies include (1) strengthening political commitment to prompt mobilization of domestic resources and formulation of a sustainable national strategy on AMR, (2) improving the infrastructure of health facilities that allow prescribers to make evidence-based clinical decisions, and (3) engaging local stakeholders to improve their buy-in and facilitate contextualizing interventions.

Trial registration

PROSPERO: CRD42021252715.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01209-4.

Implementing collaborative care for major depression in a cancer center: An observational study using mixed-methods

OBJECTIVES

To describe the implementation of a collaborative care (CC) screening and treatment program for major depression in people with cancer, found to be effective in clinical trials, into routine outpatient care of a cancer center.

METHOD

A mixed-methods observational study guided by the RE-AIM implementation framework using quantitative and qualitative data collected over five years.

RESULTS

Program set-up took three years and required more involvement of CC experts than anticipated. Barriers to implementation were uncertainty about whether oncology or psychiatry owned the program and the hospital's organizational complexity. Selecting and training CC team members was a major task. 90% (14,412/16,074) of patients participated in depression screening and 61% (136/224) of those offered treatment attended at least one session. Depression outcomes were similar to trial benchmarks (61%; 78/127 patients had a treatment response). After two years the program obtained long-term funding. Facilitators of implementation were strong trial evidence, effective integration into cancer care and ongoing clinical and managerial support.

CONCLUSION

A CC program for major depression, designed for the cancer setting, can be successfully implemented into routine care, but requires time, persistence and involvement of CC experts. Once operating it can be an effective and valued component of medical care.

Barriers, facilitators, and proposals for improvement in the implementation of a collaborative care program for depression: a qualitative study of primary care physicians and nurses

BACKGROUND

Primary care plays a central role in the treatment of depression. Nonetheless, shortcomings in its management and suboptimal outcomes have been identified. Collaborative care models improve processes for the management of depressive disorders and associated outcomes. We developed a strategy to implement the INDI collaborative care program for the management of depression in primary health care centers across Catalonia. The aim of this qualitative study was to evaluate a trial implementation of the program to identify barriers, facilitators, and proposals for improvement.

METHODS

One year after the implementation of the INDI program in 18 public primary health care centers we performed a qualitative study in which the opinions and experiences of 23 primary care doctors and nurses from the participating centers were explored in focus groups. We performed thematic content analysis of the focus group transcripts.

RESULTS

The results were organized into three categories: facilitators, barriers, and proposals for improvement as perceived by the health care professionals involved. The most important facilitator identified was the perception that the INDI collaborative care program could be a useful tool for reorganizing processes and improving the management of depression in primary care, currently viewed as deficient. The main barriers identified were of an organizational nature: heavy workloads, lack of time, high staff turnover and shortages, and competing demands. Additional obstacles were inertia and resistance to change among health care professionals. Proposals for improvement included institutional buy-in to guarantee enduring support and the organizational changes needed for successful implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The INDI program is perceived as a useful, viable program for improving the management of depression in primary care. Uptake by primary care centers and health care professionals, however, was poor. The identification and analysis of barriers and facilitators will help refine the strategy to achieve successful, widespread implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03285659 ; Registered 18th September, 2017.

Care team and practice-level implementation strategies to optimize pediatric collaborative care: study protocol for a cluster-randomized hybrid type III trial

BACKGROUND

Implementation facilitation is an effective strategy to support the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs), but our understanding of multilevel strategies and the mechanisms of change within the "black box" of implementation facilitation is limited. This implementation trial seeks to disentangle and evaluate the effects of facilitation strategies that separately target the care team and leadership levels on implementation of a collaborative care model in pediatric primary care. Strategies targeting the provider care team (TEAM) should engage team-level mechanisms, and strategies targeting leaders (LEAD) should engage organizational mechanisms.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial in a 2 × 2 factorial design to evaluate the main and interactive effects of TEAM and LEAD and test for mediation and moderation of effects. Twenty-four pediatric primary care practices will receive standard REP training to implement Doctor-Office Collaborative Care (DOCC) and then be randomized to (1) Standard REP only, (2) TEAM, (3) LEAD, or (4) TEAM + LEAD. Implementation outcomes are DOCC service delivery and change in practice-level care management competencies. Clinical outcomes are child symptom severity and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

This statewide trial is one of the first to test the unique and synergistic effects of implementation strategies targeting care teams and practice leadership. It will advance our knowledge of effective care team and practice-level implementation strategies and mechanisms of change. Findings will support efforts to improve common child behavioral health conditions by optimizing scale-up and sustainment of CCMs in a pediatric patient-centered medical home.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04946253 . Registered June 30, 2021.

Developing a tailored implementation action plan for a suicide prevention clinical intervention in an Australian mental health service: A qualitative study using the EPIS framework

Background: Tailoring implementation strategies to local contexts is a promising approach to supporting implementation and sustainment of evidence-based practices in health settings. While there is increasing research on tailored implementation of mental health interventions, implementation research on suicide prevention interventions is limited. This study aimed to evaluate implementation and subsequently develop a tailored action plan to support sustainment of an evidence-based suicide prevention intervention; Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) in an Australian public mental health service. Methods: Approximately 150 mental health staff working within a regional and remote Local Health District in Australia were trained in CAMS. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with frontline staff and clinical leaders were conducted to examine barriers and facilitators to using CAMS. Data were analysed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach and mapped to the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation and Sustainment (EPIS) framework and followed by stakeholder engagement to design a tailored implementation action plan based on a ‘tailored blueprint’ methodology. Results: A total of 22 barriers to implementing CAMS were identified. Based on the perceived impact on implementation fidelity and the feasibility of addressing identified barriers, six barriers were prioritised for addressing through an implementation action plan. These barriers were mapped to evidence-based implementation strategies and, in collaboration with local health district staff, goals and actionable steps for each strategy were generated. This information was combined into a tailored implementation plan to support the sustainable use of CAMS as part of routine care within this mental health service. Conclusions: This study provides an example of a collaborative approach to tailoring strategies for implementation on a large scale. Novel insights were obtained into the challenges of evaluating the implementation process and barriers to implementing an evidence-based suicide prevention treatment approach within a geographically large and varied mental health service in Australia. Plain language abstract: This study outlines the process of using a collaborative stakeholder engagement approach to develop tailored implementation plans. Using the Exploration Preparation Implementation Sustainment Framework, findings identify the barriers to and strategies for implementing a clinical suicide prevention intervention in an Australian community mental health setting. This is the first known study to use an implementation science framework to investigate the implementation of the clinical suicide prevention intervention (Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality) within a community mental health setting. This work highlights the challenges of conducting implementation research in a dynamic public health service.

Adoption of care management activities by primary care nurses for people with common mental disorders and physical conditions: A multiple case study

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: The collaborative care model is a well-known model to improve care quality for people with common mental disorders and physical conditions in primary care. The role of care manager is central to the collaborative care model, and primary care nurses are well-positioned to play that role. Adopting the role of care manager by primary care nurses is challenging due to several contextual factors; however, few implementation studies examined the context and current practices before implementing the role of care manager and the collaborative care model. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The paper contributes to the advancement of knowledge about the pre-assessment of current practices before implementing the collaborative care model and the role of care manager. The paper offers a better understanding of the relationships between the context and the performance of care management activities by primary care nurses. The paper describes an innovative analysis technique to assess the gap between care management activities recommended in the collaborative care model and actual nursing activities. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Primary care nurses would benefit from having timely access to clinical support from mental health nurse practitioners in order to build their competency. Determinants of practice and the analysis technique to assess current practices will help other researchers or quality improvement teams to develop their plan when implementing the role of care manager. ABSTRACT: Introduction Few studies assessed current nursing practices before implementing the collaborative care model and the role of care manager for people with common mental disorders (CMDs) and physical conditions in primary care settings. Aim Evaluate the main determinants of practice that influence the adoption of care management activities by primary care nurses for people with CMDs and physical conditions. Methods A qualitative multiple case study was conducted in three primary care clinics. A total of 33 participants were recruited. Various data sources were combined: interviews (n = 32), nurse-patient encounters' observations (n = 7), documents and summaries of meetings with stakeholders (n = 8). Results Seven determinants were identified (1) access to external mental health resources; (2) clarification of local CMD care trajectory; (3) compatibility between the coordination of nursing work and the role of care manager; (4) availability of mental health resources within the primary care clinic; (5) competency in care management and competency building; (6) responsibility sharing between the general practitioner and the primary care nurse; and (7) common understanding of the patient treatment plan. Implications for practice To build their competency in care management for people with CMDs, primary care nurses would benefit from having clinical support from mental health nurse practitioners.

The care manager meeting the patients' unique needs using the care manager model-A qualitative study of experienced care managers

Background

Implementation of a care manager in a collaborative care team in Swedish primary care via a randomized controlled trial showed successful outcome. As four years have elapsed since the implementation of care managers, it is important to gain knowledge about the care managers’ long-term skills and experiences. The purpose was to examine how long-term experienced care managers perceived and experienced their role and how they related to and applied the care manager model.

Method

Qualitative study with a focus group and interviews with nine nurses who had worked for more than two years as care managers for common mental disorders. The analysis used Systematic Text Condensation.

Results

Four codes arose from the analysis: Person-centred; Acting outside the comfort zone; Successful, albeit some difficulties; Pride and satisfaction. The care manager model served as a handrail for the care manager, providing a trustful and safe environment. Difficulties sometimes arose in the collaboration with other professionals.

Conclusion

This study shows that long-term experience of working as a care manager contributed to an in-depth insight and understanding of the care manager model and enabled care managers to be flexible and act outside the comfort zone when providing care and support to the patient. A new concept emerged during the analytical process, i.e. the Anchored Care Manager, which described the special competencies gained through experience.

Trial registration

NCT02378272 Care Manager—Coordinating Care for Person Centered Management of Depression in Primary Care (PRIM—CARE).

Collaborative care model for depression in rural Nepal: a mixed-methods implementation research study

INTRODUCTION

Despite carrying a disproportionately high burden of depression, patients in low-income countries lack access to effective care. The collaborative care model (CoCM) has robust evidence for clinical effectiveness in improving mental health outcomes. However, evidence from real-world implementation of CoCM is necessary to inform its expansion in low-resource settings.

METHODS

We conducted a 2-year mixed-methods study to assess the implementation and clinical impact of CoCM using the WHO Mental Health Gap Action Programme protocols in a primary care clinic in rural Nepal. We used the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) implementation research framework to adapt and study the intervention. To assess implementation factors, we qualitatively studied the impact on providers' behaviour to screen, diagnose and treat mental illness. To assess clinical impact, we followed a cohort of 201 patients with moderate to severe depression and determined the proportion of patients who had a substantial clinical response (defined as ≥50% decrease from baseline scores of Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) to measure depression) by the end of the study period.

RESULTS

Providers experienced improved capability (enhanced self-efficacy and knowledge), greater opportunity (via access to counsellors, psychiatrist, medications and diagnostic tests) and increased motivation (developing positive attitudes towards people with mental illness and seeing patients improve) to provide mental healthcare. We observed substantial clinical response in 99 (49%; 95% CI: 42% to 56%) of the 201 cohort patients, with a median seven point (Q1:-9, Q3:-2) decrease in PHQ-9 scores (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Using the COM-B framework, we successfully adapted and implemented CoCM in rural Nepal, and found that it enhanced providers' positive perceptions of and engagement in delivering mental healthcare. We observed clinical improvement of depression comparable to controlled trials in high-resource settings. We recommend using implementation research to adapt and evaluate CoCM in other resource-constrained settings to help expand access to high-quality mental healthcare.

Primary care-based screening and management of depression amongst heavy drinking patients: Interim secondary outcomes of a three-country quasi-experimental study in Latin America

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of evidence-based care for heavy drinking and depression remains low in global health systems. We tested the impact of providing community support, training, and clinical packages of varied intensity on depression screening and management for heavy drinking patients in Latin American primary healthcare.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Quasi-experimental study involving 58 primary healthcare units in Colombia, Mexico and Peru randomized to receive: (1) usual care (control); (2) training using a brief clinical package; (3) community support plus training using a brief clinical package; (4) community support plus training using a standard clinical package. Outcomes were proportion of: (1) heavy drinking patients screened for depression; (2) screen-positive patients receiving appropriate support; (3) all consulting patients screened for depression, irrespective of drinking status.

RESULTS

550/615 identified heavy drinkers were screened for depression (89.4%). 147/230 patients screening positive for depression received appropriate support (64%). Amongst identified heavy drinkers, adjusting for country, sex, age and provider profession, provision of community support and training had no impact on depression activity rates. Intensity of clinical package also did not affect delivery rates, with comparable performance for brief and standard versions. However, amongst all consulting patients, training providers resulted in significantly higher rates of alcohol measurement and in turn higher depression screening rates; 2.7 times higher compared to those not trained.

CONCLUSIONS

Training using a brief clinical package increased depression screening rates in Latin American primary healthcare. It is not possible to determine the effectiveness of community support on depression activity rates due to the impact of COVID-19.

Collaborative care for depression management in primary care: A randomized roll-out trial using a type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation design

Background

The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is a well-established treatment for depression in primary care settings. The critical drivers and specific strategies for improving implementation and sustainment are largely unknown. Rigorous pragmatic research is needed to understand CoCM implementation processes and outcomes.

Methods

This study is a hybrid Type 2 randomized roll-out effectiveness-implementation trial of CoCM in 11 primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. The Collaborative Behavioral Health Program (CBHP) was developed as a means of improving access to effective mental health services for depression. Implementation strategies are provided to all practices. Using a sequential mixed methods approach, we will assess key stakeholders’ perspectives on barriers and facilitators of implementation and sustainability of CBHP. The speed and quantity of implementation activities completed over a 30-month period for each practice will be assessed. Economic analyses will be conducted to determine the budget impact and cost offset of CBHP in the healthcare system. We hypothesize that CBHP will be effective in reducing depressive symptoms and spillover effects on chronic health conditions. We will also examine differential outcomes among racial/ethnic minority patients.

Discussion

This study will elucidate critical drivers of successful CoCM implementation. It will be among the first to conduct economic analyses on a fee-for-service model utilizing billing codes for CoCM. Data may inform ways to improve implementation efficiency with an optimization approach to successive practices due to the roll-out design. Changes to the protocol and current status of the study are discussed.

Integrating mental health care into home-based nursing services: A qualitative study utilising normalisation process theory

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing community nurses being trained as psychological wellbeing practitioners and integrating this practice into home-based primary care nursing, through key stakeholders' perceptions.

BACKGROUND

Current drivers in UK primary care aim to increase access to mental health services and treatment, to achieve parity of esteem between physical and mental health care for patients who are housebound. However, there remains limited evidence on how to successfully implement this. Training community nurses as psychological wellbeing practitioners to offer mental health care alongside their current home-based services is one option.

DESIGN

A pluralistic qualitative study. This study followed the COREQ checklist for reporting qualitative research.

METHODS

Twenty key stakeholders were purposively recruited and interviewed including twelve health professionals and eight patients. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using a theoretical thematic analysis informed by normalisation process theory concepts of coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring, to explore the barriers and facilitators to implementation.

RESULTS

Staff and patients reported high coherence and cognitive participation, valuing the integrated roles. Facilitators included the development of clearer referral pathways and increased mental health knowledge in the wider team. However, sustainability and current siloed healthcare systems were identified as barriers to implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

A key obstacle to long-term implementation was the practical structures and financial boundaries of siloed healthcare systems, making long-term sustainability unviable.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Community nurses with additional mental health training can integrate these skills in practice and are valued by their team and patients offering holistic care to patients within their home and informal knowledge transfer to the wider team. However, long-term sustainability is required if this is to be adopted routinely. Further evidence is needed to better understand the positive outcomes to patients and potential cost savings.

Sport and Recreational Physical Activities Attenuate the Predictive Association of Multimorbidity With Increased Geriatric Depressive Symptoms: A 14-Year Follow-Up Study of Community-Dwelling Older Adults

Multimorbidity is associated with increased depression risks. Little research examines how physical exercise moderates this association. From an existing cohort of community-dwelling older adults in Hong Kong recruited in 2001-2003, the authors included participants who were successfully interviewed after 14 years (2015-2017). Geriatric depressive symptoms were used as the primary outcome and measured by the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, while multimorbidity was operationalized using a list of 19 conditions. Subscores of the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly measuring light, moderate, and strenuous sport/recreational activities were included as moderators. In total, 1,056 participants were included, of whom 50.7% were multimorbid. Multimorbidity was associated with 12% more geriatric depressive symptoms, but strenuous physical activities were associated with a smaller risk elevation only among multimorbid patients (adjusted relative risk = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [0.98, 0.99]; p = .001). In conclusion, strenuous sport and recreational activities may attenuate the association between multimorbidity and geriatric depressive symptoms.

Clinician perceptions of common mental disorders before and after implementation of a consultation-liaison psychiatry service: a longitudinal qualitative study in government-operated primary care settings in Penang, Malaysia

OBJECTIVES

To explore primary care clinician perceptions of barriers and facilitators in delivering care for common mental disorders (CMD) before and after implementation of a consultation-liaison psychiatry service (Psychiatry in Primary Care (PIPC)) in government-operated primary care clinics and to explore the clinicians' experience of the PIPC service itself.

DESIGN

This longitudinal qualitative study was informed by the Normalisation Process Model and involved audiotaped semi-structured individual interviews with front-line clinicians before (Time 1) and after (Time 2) the PIPC intervention. The Framework Method was used in the thematic analysis of pre/post interview transcripts.

SETTING

Two government-operated primary care clinics in Penang, Malaysia.

PARTICIPANTS

17 primary care medical, nursing and allied health staff recruited purposely to achieve a range of disciplines and a balanced representation from both clinics.

INTERVENTION

Psychiatrists, accompanied by medical students in small numbers, provided one half-day consultation visit per week, to front-line clinicians in each clinic over an 8-month period. The service involved psychiatric assessment of patients with suspected CMDs, with face-to-face discussion with the referring clinician before and after the patient assessment.

RESULTS

At Time 1 interviewees tended to equate CMDs with stress and embraced a holistic model of care while also reporting considerable autonomy in mental healthcare and positively appraising their current practices. At Time 2, post-intervention, participants demonstrated a shift towards greater understanding of CMDs as treatable conditions. They reported time pressures and the demands of key performance indicators in other areas as barriers to participation in PIPC. Yet they showed increased awareness of current service deficits and of their potential in delivering improved mental healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite resource-related and structural barriers to implementation of national mental health policy in Malaysian primary care settings, our findings suggest that front-line clinicians are receptive to future interventions designed to improve the mental healthcare capacity.

An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Barriers and Facilitators

Introduction:

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is becoming more widespread in primary care due to the increasing complex needs of patients. However, its implementation can be challenging. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of IPC in primary care settings.

Methods:

An overview of reviews was carried out. Nine databases were searched, and two independent reviewers took part in review selection, data extraction and quality assessment. A thematic synthesis was carried out to highlight the main barriers and facilitators, according to the type of IPC and their level of intervention (system, organizational, inter-individual and individual).

Results:

Twenty-nine reviews were included, classified according to six types of IPC: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 11), primary care physician (PCP)-nurse in primary care (n = 2), PCP-specialty care provider (n = 3), PCP-pharmacist (n = 2), PCP-mental health care provider (n = 6), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 5). Most barriers and facilitators were reported at the organizational and inter-individual levels. Main barriers referred to lack of time and training, lack of clear roles, fears relating to professional identity and poor communication. Principal facilitators included tools to improve communication, co-location and recognition of other professionals’ skills and contribution.

Conclusions:

The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care.

How do care providers evaluate collaboration? - qualitative process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of collaborative and stepped care for patients with mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Collaborative and stepped care (CSC) models are recommended for mental disorders. Their successful implementation depends on effective collaboration between involved care providers from primary and specialist care. To gain insights into the collaboration experiences of care providers in CSC against the backdrop of usual mental health care, a qualitative process evaluation was realized as part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (COMET) of a collaborative and stepped care model in Hamburg (Germany).

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with N = 24 care providers from primary and specialist care (outpatient psychotherapists and psychiatrists, inpatient/ day clinic mental health providers) within and outside of COMET at the trial's beginning and 12 months later. Interviews were analyzed applying a qualitative structuring content analysis approach, combining deductive and inductive category development.

RESULTS

Usual mental health care was considered deficient in resources, with collaboration being scarce and mainly taking place in small informal networks. Within the COMET trial, quicker referral paths were welcomed, as were quarterly COMET network meetings which provided room for exchange and fostered mutual understanding. Yet, also in COMET, collaboration remained difficult due to communication problems, the unfavorable regional distribution of the COMET care providers and interprofessional discrepancies regarding each profession's role, competencies and mutual esteem. Ideas for improvement included more localized networks, the inclusion of further professions and the overall amelioration of mental health care regarding resources and remuneration, especially for collaborative activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The process evaluation of the COMET trial revealed the benefits of creating room for interprofessional encounter to foster collaborative care. Despite the benefits of faster patient referrals, the COMET network did not fulfill all care providers' prior expectations. A focus should be set on interprofessional competencies, mutual perception and role clarification, as these have been revealed as significant barriers to collaboration within CSC models such as COMET.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The COMET trial (Collaborative and Stepped Care in Mental Health by Overcoming Treatment Sector Barriers) has been registered on July 24, 2017 under the trial registration number NCT03226743 .

An Analysis of the Sustainability of a Collaborative Care Program Used to Deliver Integrated Mental Health Care Within a Micronesian Island State

Adequate access to mental health care is a global problem, including in the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM). The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) offers an opportunity to deliver improved access to mental health services in primary care centers, and key factors to program sustainability have been investigated in high-income country settings. This study's objective was to evaluate how well factors associated with sustainability have been incorporated into a CoCM in Kosrae, Federated States of Micronesia. The Kosraean CoCM's strengths included its supportive leadership, team member training, and having a strong care manager and engaged primary care provider champion. Opportunities for growth included further development of its financial viability, information technology systems, change readiness, and operational procedures. Our program found that having a stable and invested staff and leveraging its current strengths were important to its viability. In an international partnership, it is also critical to develop strong relationships among team members and to have stable internet connectivity to facilitate regular communication. These lessons learned can be applicable to other integrated care programs in similar Pacific Island countries.

The Influence of Contextual Factors on the Process of Formulating Strategies to Improve the Adoption of Care Manager Activities by Primary Care Nurses

Background:

Primary care nurses are well-suited to provide care management for common mental disorders, but their practices depend on context. Various strategies can be considered to improve the adoption of nursing care manager activities, but data from implementation studies rarely address strategy formulation.

Aim:

To analyze the influence of contextual factors on strategy formulation to improve the adoption of care manager activities by primary care nurses.

Method:

A qualitative multiple case study in three primary care clinics was carried out. Data were collected through individual interviews (n = 32) and observations (n = 7), working group meetings, and relevant documents. Thematic analysis was conducted.

Results:

Contextual factors influenced strategy formulation through organizational readiness for change, which resulted from tension for change and perceived organizational ability to implement change. Tension for change was generated through the perceived gap between patient needs and service availability, perceived compatibility with the nurses work environment, and their assessment of their capacity to perform care manager activities or acquire the necessary skills.

Conclusion:

Future studies should give sufficient attention to implementation strategy formulation and consider the dynamic role of organizational readiness for change when facilitating the adoption of evidence-based practices for common mental disorders in primary care.

Social prescribing for people with complex needs: a realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Social Prescribing is increasingly popular, and several evaluations have shown positive results. However, Social Prescribing is an umbrella term that covers many different interventions. We aimed to test, develop and refine a programme theory explaining the underlying mechanisms operating in Social Prescribing to better enhance its effectiveness by allowing it to be targeted to those who will benefit most, when they will benefit most.

METHODS

We conducted a realist evaluation of a large Social Prescribing organisation in the North of England. Thirty-five interviews were conducted with stakeholders (clients attending Social Prescribing, Social Prescribing staff and general practice staff). Through an iterative process of analysis, a series of context-mechanism-outcome configurations were developed, refined and retested at a workshop of 15 stakeholders. The initial programme theory was refined, retested and 'applied' to wider theory.

RESULTS

Social Prescribing in this organisation was found to be only superficially similar to collaborative care. A complex web of contexts, mechanisms and outcomes for its clients are described. Key elements influencing outcomes described by stakeholders included social isolation and wider determinants of health; poor interagency communication for people with multiple needs. Successful Social Prescribing requires a non-stigmatising environment and person-centred care, and shares many features described by the asset-based theory of Salutogenesis.

CONCLUSIONS

The Social Prescribing model studied is holistic and person-centred and as such enables those with a weak sense of coherence to strengthen this, access resistance resources, and move in a health promoting or salutogenic direction.

Implementation of sustainable complex interventions in health care services: the triple C model

BACKGROUND

The changing and evolving healthcare environment means organisations are under increasing pressure to deliver value-based, high quality care to patients through enabling access, reducing costs and improving outcomes. These factors result in an increased pressure to deliver efficient and beneficial interventions to improve patient care and support sustainability beyond the scope of the implementation of such interventions. Additionally, the literature highlights the importance of coordination, cooperation and working together across areas is critical to achieving implementation success. This paper discusses the development of a triple C model for implementation that supports sustainability of complex interventions in health care services.

METHODS

In order to develop the proposed implementation model, we adapted the formal tradition of theory building that is described in sociology. Firstly, we conducted a review of the literature on complex interventions and the available implementation models used to embed these interventions to identify the key aspects relating to successful implementation. Secondly, we devised a framework that encompassed these findings into a simple and workable model that can be easily embedded into everyday practice. This proposed model uses clear, systemic explanation, adds to the current knowledge in this area and is fit for purpose, providing healthcare workers with a simple easy-to-follow framework to embed practice change.

RESULTS

A three-stage implementation model was devised based on the findings of the literature and named the Triple C model (Consultation, Collaboration and Consolidation). The three stages are interconnected and overlap to support sustainability is considered at all levels of the project ensuring its greater success. This model considers the sustainability within any implementation project. Sustainability of interventions are a key consideration for continuous and successful change in any health care organisation. A set of criteria were developed for each of the three stages to support adaptability and sustainment of interventions are maintained throughout the life of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

Ensuring sustainability of interventions requires continuing effort and embedding the need for sustainability throughout all stages of an implementation project. The Triple C model offers a new approach for healthcare clinicians to support sustainability of organizational change.

Implementing Measurement-Based Care for Depression: Practical Solutions for Psychiatrists and Primary Care Physicians

Measurement-based care (MBC) can be defined as the clinical practice in which care providers collect patient data through validated outcome scales and use the results to guide their decision-making processes. Despite growing evidence supporting the effectiveness of MBC for depression and other mental health conditions, many physicians and mental health clinicians have yet to adopt MBC practice. In part, this is due to individual and organizational barriers to implementing MBC in busy clinical settings. In this paper, we briefly review the evidence for the efficacy of MBC focusing on pharmacological management of depression and provide example clinical scenarios to illustrate its potential clinical utility in psychiatric settings. We discuss the barriers and challenges for MBC adoption and then address these by suggesting simple solutions to implement MBC for depression care, including recommended outcome scales, monitoring tools, and technology solutions such as cloud-based MBC services and mobile health apps for mood tracking. The availability of MBC tools, ranging from paper-pencil questionnaires to mobile health technology, can allow psychiatrists and clinicians in all types of practice settings to easily incorporate MBC into their practices and improve outcomes for their patients with depression.

Implementing collaborative care for older people with comorbid hypertension and depression in rural China

BACKGROUND

Depression often coexists with other chronic conditions in older people. The COACH study is an ongoing random controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of a primary-care-based collaborative care approach to treat co-morbid hypertension and depression in Chinese rural elders. In the COACH model, a team-village doctor (VD), aging worker (AW), and psychiatrist consultant-provides collaborative care to enrolled subjects in each intervention village for 12 months. This study examines how COACH was implemented and identifies facilitators and barriers for its more widespread implementation.

METHODS

Five focus groups were conducted, two with VDs, two with AWs, and one with psychiatrists, for a total of 38 participants. Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

COACH care-team members showed shared understanding and appreciation of the team approach and integrated management of hypertension and depression. Team collaboration was smooth. All members regarded COACH to be effective in reducing depressive symptoms and improving patient health. Facilitators to implementation include training, leaders' support, geographic proximity between VD and AW pairs, preexisting relationships among care-team members, comparability of COACH activities and existing practices of VDs and AWs, and care team members' caring about older members of their villages. Barriers to sustainability include frustration of some VDs related to their low wages and feelings of overload of some AWs.

CONCLUSIONS

COACH was positively perceived and successfully implemented. The findings offer guidance for planning primary-care-based collaborative depression care in low- and middle-income countries.

Collaborative care for mental health: a qualitative study of the experiences of patients and health professionals

BACKGROUND

Health policy in many countries directs treatment to the lowest effective care level and encourages collaboration between primary and specialist mental health care. A number of models for collaborative care have been developed, and patient benefits are being reported. Less is known about what enables and prevents implementation and sustainability of such models regarding the actions and attitudes of stakeholders on the ground. This article reports from a qualitative sub-study of a cluster-RCT testing a model for collaborative care in Oslo, Norway. The model involved the placement of psychologists and psychiatrists from a community mental health centre in each intervention GP practice. GPs could seek their input or advice when needed and refer patients to them for assessment (including assessment of the need for external services) or treatment.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with GPs (n = 7), CMHC specialists (n = 6) and patients (n = 11) in the intervention arm. Sample specific topic guides were used to investigate the experience of enablers and barriers to the collaborative care model. Data were subject to stepwise deductive-inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants reported positive experiences of how the model improved accessibility. First, co-location made GPs and CMHC specialists accessible to each other and facilitated detailed, patient-centred case collaboration and learning through complementary skills. The threshold for patients' access to specialist care was lowered, treatment could commence early, and throughput increased. Treatment episodes were brief (usually 5-10 sessions) and this was too brief according to some patients. Second, having experienced mental health specialists in the team and on the front line enabled early assessment of symptoms and of the type of treatment and service that patients required and were entitled to, and who could be treated at the GP practice. This improved both care pathways and referral practices. Barriers revolved around the organisation of care. Logistical issues could be tricky but were worked out. The biggest obstacle was the funding of health care at a structural level, which led to economic losses for both the GP practices and the CMHC, making the model unsustainable.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants identified a range of benefits of collaborative care for both patients and services. However, the funding system in effect penalises collaborative work. It is difficult to see how policy aiming for successful, sustainable collaboration can be achieved without governments changing funding structures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03624829.

Parallel Journeys of Patients with Cancer and Depression: Challenges and Opportunities for Technology-Enabled Collaborative Care

Depression is common but under-treated in patients with cancer, despite being a major modifiable contributor to morbidity and early mortality. Integrating psychosocial care into cancer services through the team-based Collaborative Care Management (CoCM) model has been proven to be effective in improving patient outcomes in cancer centers. However, there is currently a gap in understanding the challenges that patients and their care team encounter in managing co-morbid cancer and depression in integrated psycho-oncology care settings. Our formative study examines the challenges and needs of CoCM in cancer settings with perspectives from patients, care managers, oncologists, psychiatrists, and administrators, with a focus on technology opportunities to support CoCM. We find that: (1) patients with co-morbid cancer and depression struggle to navigate between their cancer and psychosocial care journeys, and (2) conceptualizing co-morbidities as separate and independent care journeys is insufficient for characterizing this complex care context. We then propose the parallel journeys framework as a conceptual design framework for characterizing challenges that patients and their care team encounter when cancer and psychosocial care journeys interact. We use the challenges discovered through the lens of this framework to highlight and prioritize technology design opportunities for supporting whole-person care for patients with co-morbid cancer and depression.

A systematic review of pharmacist input to metabolic syndrome screening, management and prevention

Background Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of factors that increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and include: diabetes and prediabetes, abdominal obesity, elevated triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high blood-pressure. However, the role of the pharmacist in the metabolic syndrome has not yet been fully explored. Aim of the review This systematic review aimed to critically appraise, synthesise, and present the available evidence on pharmacists’ input to the screening, prevention and management of metabolic syndrome. Method The final protocol was based on the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P)”. Studies published in English from January 2008 to March 2020 reporting any pharmacist activities in the screening, prevention or management of metabolic syndrome were included. Databases searched were Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cochrane and Google Scholar. Studies were assessed for quality by two researchers, data extracted and findings synthesised using a narrative approach. Results Of the 39,430 titles reviewed, ten studies were included (four were randomised controlled trials). Most studies focused on pharmacist input to metabolic syndrome screening and management. Screening largely involved communicating metabolic parameters to physicians. Management of metabolic syndrome described pharmacists collaborating with members of the multidisciplinary team. A positive impact was reported in all studies, including achieving metabolic syndrome parameter goals, reverting to a non-metabolic syndrome status and, improved medication adherence. The populations studied were paediatrics with risk factors, adults with comorbidities and psychiatric patients. Integration of the pharmacist within the multidisciplinary team, an easy referral process and accessibility of service were potential facilitators. Inadequate funding was the key barrier. Conclusion The studies describing pharmacist input in metabolic syndrome provide limited evidence of positive outcomes from screening and management as part of collaborative practice. Further work is required to provide more robust evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness while considering key barriers.

Understanding Barriers to and Facilitators of Case Management in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis

PURPOSE

Despite evidence on the benefits of case management for the care of patients with complex needs in primary care, implementing the program-necessary to achieve its benefits-has been challenging worldwide. Evidence on factors affecting implementation remains disparate. Accordingly, the objective of this systematic review was to identify barriers to and facilitators of case management, from the perspectives of health care professionals, in primary care settings around the world.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative findings. In collaboration with 2 librarians, we searched 3 electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE) for studies related to factors affecting case management function in primary care. Two researchers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion, then assessed included studies for quality. Results from included studies were synthesized by thematic synthesis, and a framework was developed.

RESULTS

Of 1,640 unique records identified, 22 studies, originating from 6 countries, met the inclusion criteria. We identified 9 barriers and facilitators: family context; policy and available resources; physician buy-in and understanding of the case manager role; relationship building; team communication practices; autonomy of case managers; training in technology; relationships with patients; and time pressure and workload. We describe these factors, then present a framework demonstrating the relationships among them.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study's findings show that multiple factors influence case management implementation. These findings have implications for researchers, clinicians, and policy makers who strive to implement or reform case management programs in local or larger primary care settings.

Individual, health system, and contextual barriers and facilitators for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines: a systematic metareview

Introduction

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to improve the quality of care and reduce unjustified individual variation in clinical practice. Knowledge of the barriers and facilitators that influence the implementation of the CPG recommendations is the first step in creating strategies to improve health outcomes. The present systematic meta-review sought to explore the barriers and facilitators for the implementation of CPGs.

Methods

A search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Health System Evidence and International Guideline Library (G-I-N) databases. Systematic reviews of qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods studies that identified barriers or facilitators for the implementation of CPGs were included. The selection of the title and abstract, the evaluation of the full text, extraction of the data and the quality assessment were carried out by two independent reviewers. To summarise the evidence, we grouped the barriers and facilitators according to the following contexts: political and social, health organisational system, guidelines, health professionals and patients.

Results

Overall, 25 systematic reviews were selected. The relevant barriers in the social-political context were the absence of a leader, difficulties with teamwork and a lack of agreement with colleagues. Relevant barriers in the health system were a lack of time, financial problems and a lack of specialised personnel. Barriers of the CPGs included a lack of clarity and a lack of credibility in the evidence. Regarding the health professional, a lack of knowledge about the CPG and confidence in oneself were relevant. Regarding patients, a negative attitude towards implementation, a lack of knowledge about the CPG and sociocultural beliefs played a role. Some of the most frequent facilitators were consistent leadership, commitment of the members of the team, administrative support of the institution, existence of multidisciplinary teams, application of technology to improve the practice and education regarding the guidelines.

Conclusions

The barriers and facilitators described in this review are factors that influence the implementation of evidence in clinical practice. Knowledge of these factors should contribute to the development of a theoretical basis for the creation of CPG implementation strategies to improve professional practice and health outcomes for patients.

Implementation of care managers for patients with depression: a cross-sectional study in Swedish primary care

OBJECTIVES

To perform an analysis of collaborative care with a care manager implementation in a primary healthcare setting. The study has a twofold aim: (1) to examine clinicians' and directors' perceptions of implementing collaborative care with a care manager for patients with depression at the primary care centre (PCC), and (2) to identify barriers and facilitators that influenced this implementation.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was performed in 2016-2017 in parallel with a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

36 PCCs in south-west Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

PCCs' directors and clinicians.

OUTCOME

Data regarding the study's aims were collected by two web-based questionnaires (directors, clinicians). Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 36 PCCs, 461 (59%) clinicians and 36 (100%) directors participated. Fifty-two per cent of clinicians could cooperate with the care manager without problems. Forty per cent regarded to their knowledge of the care manager assignment as insufficient. Around two-thirds perceived that collaborating with the care manager was part of their duty as PCC staff. Almost 90% of the PCCs' directors considered that the assignment of the care manager was clearly designed, around 70% considered the priority of the implementation to be high and around 90% were positive to the implementation. Facilitators consisted of support from colleagues and directors, cooperative skills and positive attitudes. Barriers were high workload, shortage of staff and extensive requirements and demands from healthcare management.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms that the care manager puts collaborative care into practice. Facilitators and barriers of the implementation, such as time, information, soft values and attitudes, financial structure need to be considered when implementing care managers at PCCs.

A comparative effectiveness trial of an information technology enhanced peer-integrated collaborative care intervention versus enhanced usual care for US trauma care systems: Clinical study protocol

Annually approximately 2-3 million Americans are so severely injured that they require inpatient hospitalization. The study team, which includes patients, clinical researchers, front-line provider and policy maker stakeholders, has been working together for over a decade to develop interventions that target improvements for US trauma care systems nationally. This pragmatic randomized trial compares a multidisciplinary team collaborative care intervention that integrates front-line trauma center staff with peer interventionists, versus trauma team notification of patient emotional distress with mental health consultation as enhanced usual care. The peer-integrated collaborative care intervention will be supported by a novel emergency department exchange health information technology platform. A total of 424 patients will be randomized to peer-integrated collaborative care (n = 212) and surgical team notification (n = 212) conditions. The study hypothesizes that patient's randomized to peer integrated collaborative care intervention will demonstrate significant reductions in emergency department health service utilization, severity of patient concerns, post traumatic stress disorder symptoms, and physical limitations when compared to surgical team notification. These four primary outcomes will be followed-up at 1- 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months after injury for all patients. The Rapid Assessment Procedure Informed Clinical Ethnography (RAPICE) method will be used to assess implementation processes. Data from the primary outcome analysis and implementation process assessment will be used to inform an end-of-study policy summit with the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. The policy summit will facilitate acute care practice changes related to patient-centered care transitions over the course of a single 5-year funding cycle. Trial registration: (Clinicaltrials.govNCT03569878).

Psychotherapists' perspectives on collaboration and stepped care in outpatient psychotherapy-A qualitative study

Objective

Stepped and collaborative care with outpatient psychotherapy as one treatment step is guideline-recommended for mental health care. To date, the experiences and evaluation of psychotherapists regarding collaboration and stepped care have been neglected. In order to improve collaborative mental health care, this qualitative study aimed at identifying psychotherapists’ perspectives and needs within collaboration and stepped care.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 German outpatient psychotherapists were conducted and analyzed applying thematic analysis. The analysis was realized in a recursive process to first identify themes and then relate these themes back to the research questions with regard to collaboration and stepped care.

Results

Collaboration mainly took place in small networks, with general practitioners and psychiatrists as the most important partners and psychotherapists wishing to intensify collaboration. Main barriers for collaboration were seen in deficient resources and remuneration and in a perceived lack of esteem by other medical specialties. Stepped care was appreciated for intensified collaboration and low-threshold access to care. Doubts were cast on its implementation within current health care conditions, worries concerned a primacy of economic principles instead of patient-orientation. Among further needs, psychotherapists demanded increased knowledge about psychotherapy, especially among general practitioners.

Conclusion

Psychotherapists expressed ambivalent attitudes towards stepped and collaborative care, substantially influenced by health care conditions and the perceived own standing among care providers. Psychotherapists’ needs within stepped care comprise intensified collaboration, sufficient time, personal and financial resources for collaboration and opportunities for a constructive interprofessional dialogue.