Leveraging implementation science to reduce inequities in Children's mental health care: highlights from a multidisciplinary international colloquium

Needs and Attitudes Related to the Adoption of Evidence-Based Practices Among Latinx Mental Health Professionals

Empirically supported interventions are warranted to achieve desired clinical outcomes and improve service delivery. Thus, efforts to identify, adopt, and implement Evidence-Based Practices (EBPs) are underway across various Latinx communities, including Puerto Ricans, where there is a growing recognition and prevalence of mental health and substance use disorders. This study investigated the needs and attitudes toward EBPs among an interdisciplinary sample of mental health professionals in Puerto Rico. An anonymous survey was distributed to social workers, psychologists, and professional counselors (N = 237). Using structural equation modeling, four dimensions of attitudes towards EBPs (openness, divergence, appeal, and requirement) were regressed on various individual and organizational factors. Some socio-demographic characteristics, educational opportunities, and organizational factors significantly contributed to specific attitudes related to the adoption of EBPs. Female participants and those working in rural settings scored higher in the openness to innovation dimension. Greater organizational support and graduating from a private institution were associated with more divergence from research, while married individuals and those trained on EBPs scored lower on this dimension. The lack of exposure to EBPs in college and younger age predicted greater interest in the appeal of adopting an EBP intervention (i.e., would adopt an EBP if it made sense). No differences in attitudes toward EBPs were found by professional discipline or work setting (i.e., clinical, community, and schools). Recommendations to increase openness and interest in the appeal of EBPs among Spanish-speaking professional communities in Latin America are highlighted.

Moving beyond Aim Three: a need for a transdisciplinary approach to build capacity for economic evaluations in implementation science

BACKGROUND

Understanding the costs and economic benefits of implementation has been identified by policymakers and researchers as critical to increase the uptake and sustainment of evidence-based practices, but this topic remains relatively understudied. Conducting team science with health economists has been proposed as a solution to increase economic evaluation in implementation science; however, these recommendations ignore the differences in goals and perspectives in these two fields. Our recent qualitative research identified that implementation researchers predominantly approach health economists to examine costs, whereas the majority of health economists expressed limited interest in conducting economic evaluations and a desire to be more integrated within implementation science initiatives. These interviews pointed to challenges in establishing fruitful partnerships when health economists are relegated to the "Third Aim" (i.e., lowest-priority research objective) in implementation science projects by their research partners.

DISCUSSION

In this debate paper, we argue that implementation researchers and health economists need to focus on team science research principles to expand capacity to address pressing research questions that cut across the two fields. Specifically, we use the four-phase model of transdisciplinary research to outline the goals and processes needed to build capacity in this area (Hall et al., Transl Behav Med 2:415-30, 2012). The first phase focuses on the development of transdisciplinary research teams, including identifying appropriate partners (e.g., considering policy or public health researchers in addition to health economists) and building trust. The conceptual phase focuses on strategies to consider when developing joint research questions and methodology across fields. In the implementation phase, we outline the effective processes for conducting research projects, such as team learning. Finally, in the translation phase, we highlight how a transdisciplinary approach between health economists and implementation researchers can impact real-world practice and policy. The importance of investigating the economic impact of evidence-based practice implementation is widely recognized, but efforts have been limited due to the challenges in conducting team science across disciplines. Training in team science can help advance transdisciplinary efforts, which has the potential to increase the rigor and impact of economic evaluations in implementation science while expanding the roles taken by health economists.

Training LEADers to Accelerate Global Mental Health Disparities Research (LEAD) Program: A Research Training Program Protocol

Background: There is a critical need to address mental health needs across the globe, especially in low and middle-income countries where mental health disparities are pervasive, including among children. The global mental health disparities suggest an imperative for culturally and contextually-congruent mental health services models that expand upon the existing services and interventions for these groups. Rigorous research is a key tool in providing the scientific evidence to inform public policy and practice efforts to effectively address these needs. Yet, there is a limited number of researchers, especially those from diverse backgrounds, who study these issues. In this paper, we describe the "TrainingLEADers to Accelerate Global Mental Health Disparities Research" (LEAD) program, a research training program funded by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities and focused on global mental health disparities research for early career researchers from under-represented minority groups. Methods: The LEAD program is designed as a two-phase training program for advanced pre-doctoral students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty from diverse backgrounds in the U.S., including groups underrepresented in biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences research, interested in global mental health disparities research. Trainees are matched with mentors and participate in an intensive 12-week program. Discussion: The LEAD program seeks to provide a robust platform for the development, implementation and expansion of evidence-based culturally and contextually-congruent interventions and services models addressing global mental health disparities across the life cycle, especially in low-resource communities in the global context. By producing a sustainable network of well-trained investigators from underrepresented backgrounds, LEAD will potentially contribute to the shared lessons and efforts relevant to addressing global mental health disparities and improving care for vulnerable populations in low-resource settings.

Future Directions in Lay Health Worker Involvement in Children's Mental Health Services in the U.S

Nearly half of children meeting criteria for a mental health disorder in the United States (U.S.) do not receive the treatment they need. Unfortunately, lack of access to and engagement in mental health services can be seen at even higher rates for historically marginalized groups, including low-income, racial, and ethnic minority youth. Lay Health Workers (LHWs) represent a valuable workforce that has been identified as a promising solution to address mental health disparities. LHWs are individuals without formal mental health training who oftentimes share lived experiences with the communities that they serve. A growing body of research has supported the mobilization of LHWs to address service disparities around the globe; however, challenges persist in how to scale-up and sustain LHW models of care, with specific barriers in the U.S. In this paper, we describe LHWs' different roles and involvement in the mental health field as well as the current state of the literature around LHW implementation. We integrate the RE-AIM Framework with a conceptual model of how LHWs address disparities to outline future directions in research and practice to enhance equity in the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of LHW models of care and evidence-based practices for historically marginalized communities within the U.S.

Mental Health Services for Autistic Individuals Across the Lifespan: Recent Advances and Current Gaps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This synthesis of recent mental health services research with autistic individuals presents significant advances, current gaps, and recommendations for improving mental healthcare for this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advances include improved understanding of co-occurring mental health conditions among autistic individuals, a growing evidence base for interventions to address them, the development and implementation of new service models to support mental health for this population, and a substantial increase in mental health services and implementation research focused on autism. Ongoing challenges include a lack of mental health interventions designed for community implementation with autistic individuals, limited workforce capacity, complex and disconnected service systems, and racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in accessibility and quality of mental health services. Despite the advances in our understanding of mental health needs and mental health services for autistic individuals, several critical gaps remain. We encourage future efforts to develop and test interventions that can be used in community settings, train and incentivize the workforce to provide them, realign policies and funding with best practice, and embrace an equity-focused approach to autism research and care.

Adaptation to family-based treatment for Medicaid-insured youth with anorexia nervosa in publicly-funded settings: Protocol for a mixed methods implementation scale-out pilot study

BACKGROUND

Family-based treatment (FBT) for anorexia nervosa is an evidence-based treatment, but its effectiveness is untested among socioeconomically disadvantaged and racially diverse youth. Adapting FBT may facilitate "scale-out" for Medicaid-insured youth served in publicly-funded settings and potentially improve outcomes for more diverse populations.

METHODS

This mixed methods effectiveness-implementation Hybrid Type 3 pilot study protocol included a planning period in collaboration with the San Francisco Department of Public Health, culminating in a two-day in-person FBT training for 25 therapists in the county, followed by the opportunity to engage in one year of weekly supervision. The training incorporated FBT adaptations intended to improve fit for low-income families within community-based settings. Treatment appropriateness and acceptability will be measured immediately post-training. Following the training, cases referred for FBT will only be assigned to the trained clinicians who voluntarily opted into long-term group supervision. Clinicians treating at least one FBT case during the supervision period will report on implementation, adaptations, and patient weight gain. Finally, semi-structured interviews with clinician participants will be conducted, focused on implementation challenges and facilitators, local treatment adaptations, and overall satisfaction with FBT.

DISCUSSION

Learning about clinician adaptations will advance knowledge about treatment of eating disorders in publicly-funded community clinics, which serve a racially/ethnically and socioeconomically diverse group of youth. This project is designed to accelerate FBT implementation in publicly-funded mental health systems, and inform service improvements for underserved youth with eating disorders.

Aligning dissemination and implementation science with health policies to improve children's mental health

The prevalence of mental health problems among children (ages 0-21) in the United States remains unacceptably high and, post-COVID-19, is expected to increase dramatically. Decades of psychological knowledge about effective treatments should inform the delivery of better services. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science has been heralded as a solution to the persistent problem of poor quality services and has, to some extent, improved our understanding of the contexts of delivery systems that implement effective practices. However, there are few studies demonstrating clear, population-level impacts of psychological interventions on children. Momentum is growing among communities, cities, states, and some federal agencies to build "health in all policies" to address broad familial, social, and economic factors known to affect children's healthy development and mental health. These health policy initiatives offer a rare opportunity to repurpose D&I science, shifting it from a primary focus on evidence-based practice implementation, to a focus on policy development and implementation to support child and family health and well-being. This shift is critical as states develop policy responses to address the health and mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on already-vulnerable families. We provide a typology for building research on D&I and children's mental health policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).