The association between primary care quality and health-care use, costs and outcomes for people with serious mental illness: a retrospective observational study

Impacts of Telehealth Adoption on the Quality of Care for Individuals With Serious Mental Illness: Retrospective Observational Analysis of Veterans Affairs Administrative Data

Background

Telehealth implementation can be challenging for persons with serious mental illness (SMI), which may impact their quality of care and health outcomes. The literature on telehealth's impacts on SMI care outcomes is mixed, necessitating further investigation.

Objective

We examined the impacts of facility-level telehealth adoption on quality of care metrics over time among patients with SMI.

Methods

We analyzed Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data across 138 facilities from January 2021 to December 2022. We performed longitudinal mixed-effects regressions to identify the relationships between the proportion of facility-level telehealth visits and SMI specialty care quality metrics: engagement with primary care; access and continuity of care across a range of mental health services including psychotherapy or psychosocial rehabilitation, SMI-specific intensive outpatient programs, and intensive case management; and continuity of mental health care after a high-risk event (eg, suicide attempt).

Results

Facilities with a higher proportion of telehealth visits had reduced access and continuity of physical and mental health care for patients with SMI (P<.05). Higher telehealth adoption was associated with reduced primary care engagement (z=-4.04; P<.001), reduced access to and continuity in SMI-specific intensive case management (z=-4.49; P<.001; z=-3.15; P<.002), reductions in the continuity of care within psychotherapy and psychosocial rehabilitation (z=-3.74; P<.001), and continuity of care after a high-risk event (z=-2.46; P<.01). Telehealth uptake initially increased access to intensive outpatient but did not improve its continuity over time (z=-4.47; P<.001). Except for continuity within SMI-specific intensive case management (z=2.62; P<.009), continuity did not improve over time as telehealth became routinized.

Conclusions

Although telehealth helped preserve health care access during the pandemic, telehealth may have tradeoffs with regard to quality of care for some individuals with SMI. These data suggest that engagement strategies used by SMI-specific intensive case management may have preserved quality and could benefit other settings. Strategies that enhance telehealth implementation-selected through a health equity lens-may improve quality of care among patients with SMI.

Assessing the uptake of incentivised physical health checks for people with serious mental illness: a cohort study in primary care

BACKGROUND

People with serious mental illness are more likely to experience physical illnesses. The onset of many of these illnesses can be prevented if detected early. Physical health screening for people with serious mental illness is incentivised in primary care in England through the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF). GPs are paid to conduct annual physical health checks on patients with serious mental illness, including checks of body mass index (BMI), cholesterol, and alcohol consumption.

AIM

To assess the impact of removing and reintroducing QOF financial incentives on uptake of three physical health checks (BMI, cholesterol, and alcohol consumption) for patients with serious mental illness.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cohort study using UK primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between April 2011 and March 2020.

METHOD

A difference-in-difference analysis was employed to compare differences in the uptake of physical health checks before and after the intervention, accounting for relevant observed and unobserved confounders.

RESULTS

An immediate change was found in uptake after physical health checks were removed from, and after they were added back to, the QOF list. For BMI, cholesterol, and alcohol checks, the overall impact of removal was a reduction in uptake of 14.3, 6.8, and 11.9 percentage points, respectively. The reintroduction of BMI screening in the QOF increased the uptake by 10.2 percentage points.

CONCLUSION

This analysis supports the hypothesis that QOF incentives lead to better uptake of physical health checks.

Use of urgent, emergency and acute care by mental health service users: A record-level cohort study

BACKGROUND

People with serious mental illness experience worse physical health and greater mortality than the general population. Crude rates of A&E attendance and acute hospital admission are higher in people with serious mental illness than other hospital users. We aimed to further these findings by undertaking a standardised comparison of urgent and emergency care pathway use among users of mental health services and the general population.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis using routine data from 2013-2016 from the CUREd dataset for urgent and emergency care contacts (NHS 111, ambulance, A&E and acute admissions) and linked mental health trust data for Sheffield, England. We compared annual age- and sex-standardised usage rates for each urgent and emergency care service between users of mental health services and those without a recent history of mental health service use.

RESULTS

We found marked differences in usage rates for all four urgent and emergency care services between the general population and users of mental health services. Usage rates and the proportion of users were 5-6 times and 3-4 times higher in users of mental health services, respectively, for all urgent and emergency care services. Users of mental health services were often more likely to experience the highest or lowest acuity usage characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Current users of mental health services were heavily over-represented among urgent and emergency care users, and they made more contacts per-person. Higher service use among users of mental health services could be addressed by improved community care, more integrated physical and mental health support, and more proactive primary care. A complex pattern of service use among users of mental health services suggests this will need careful targeting to reduce avoidable contacts and optimise patient outcomes.

Identifying determinants of diabetes risk and outcomes for people with severe mental illness: a mixed-methods study

Background

People with severe mental illness experience poorer health outcomes than the general population. Diabetes contributes significantly to this health gap.

Objectives

The objectives were to identify the determinants of diabetes and to explore variation in diabetes outcomes for people with severe mental illness.

Design

Under a social inequalities framework, a concurrent mixed-methods design combined analysis of linked primary care records with qualitative interviews.

Setting

The quantitative study was carried out in general practices in England (2000–16). The qualitative study was a community study (undertaken in the North West and in Yorkshire and the Humber).

Participants

The quantitative study used the longitudinal health records of 32,781 people with severe mental illness (a subset of 3448 people had diabetes) and 9551 ‘controls’ (with diabetes but no severe mental illness), matched on age, sex and practice, from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (GOLD version). The qualitative study participants comprised 39 adults with diabetes and severe mental illness, nine family members and 30 health-care staff.

Data sources

The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (GOLD) individual patient data were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics, Office for National Statistics mortality data and the Index of Multiple Deprivation.

Results

People with severe mental illness were more likely to have diabetes if they were taking atypical antipsychotics, were living in areas of social deprivation, or were of Asian or black ethnicity. A substantial minority developed diabetes prior to severe mental illness. Compared with people with diabetes alone, people with both severe mental illness and diabetes received more frequent physical checks, maintained tighter glycaemic and blood pressure control, and had fewer recorded physical comorbidities and elective admissions, on average. However, they had more emergency admissions (incidence rate ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.36) and a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality than people with diabetes but no severe mental illness (hazard ratio 1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.59 to 2.26). These paradoxical results may be explained by other findings. For example, people with severe mental illness and diabetes were more likely to live in socially deprived areas, which is associated with reduced frequency of health checks, poorer health outcomes and higher mortality risk. In interviews, participants frequently described prioritising their mental illness over their diabetes (e.g. tolerating antipsychotic side effects, despite awareness of harmful impacts on diabetes control) and feeling overwhelmed by competing treatment demands from multiple morbidities. Both service users and practitioners acknowledged misattributing physical symptoms to poor mental health (‘diagnostic overshadowing’).

Limitations

Data may not be nationally representative for all relevant covariates, and the completeness of recording varied across practices.

Conclusions

People with severe mental illness and diabetes experience poorer health outcomes than, and deficiencies in some aspects of health care compared with, people with diabetes alone.

Future work

These findings can inform the development of targeted interventions aimed at addressing inequalities in this population.

Study registration

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Central Portfolio Management System (37024); and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03534921.

Funding

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.