Showing papers on "Integrated care published in 2015"

Integrated Medical-Behavioral Care Compared With Usual Primary Care for Child and Adolescent Behavioral Health: A Meta-analysis

Abstract: Importance Recent health care legislation and shifting health care financing strategies are transforming health and behavioral health care in the United States and incentivizing integrated medical-behavioral health care as a strategy for improving access to high-quality care for behavioral health conditions, enhancing patient outcomes, and containing costs. Objective To conduct a systematic meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to evaluate whether integrated medical-behavioral health care for children and adolescents leads to improved behavioral health outcomes compared with usual primary care. Data Sources Search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1, 1960, through December 31, 2014, yielded 6792 studies, of which 31 studies with 35 intervention-control comparisons and 13 129 participants met the study eligibility criteria. Study Selection We included randomized clinical trials that evaluated integrated behavioral health and primary medical care in children and adolescents compared with usual care in primary care settings that met prespecified methodologic quality criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis Two independent reviewers screened citations and extracted data, with raw data used when possible. Magnitude and direction of effect sizes were calculated. Main Outcomes and Measures Meta-analysis with a random effects model were conducted to examine an overall effect across all trials, and within intervention and prevention trials. Subsequent moderator analyses for intervention trials explored the relative effects of integrated care type on behavioral health outcomes. Results Meta-analysis with a random-effects model indicated a significant advantage for integrated care interventions relative to usual care on behavioral health outcomes ( d = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21-0.44; P d = 0.42; 95% CI, 0.29-0.55; P d = 0.07; 95% CI, −0.13 to 0.28; P = .49). The probability was 66% that a randomly selected youth would have a better outcome after receiving integrated medical-behavioral treatment than a randomly selected youth after receiving usual care. The strongest effects were seen for treatment interventions that targeted mental health problems and those that used collaborative care models. Conclusions and Relevance Our results, demonstrating the benefits of integrated medical-behavioral primary care for improving youth behavioral health outcomes, enhance confidence that the increased incentives for integrated health and behavioral health care in the US health care system will yield improvements in the health of children and adolescents.

Transitions of Care in Heart Failure A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Abstract: In patients with heart failure (HF), use of 30-day rehospitalization as a healthcare metric and increased pressure to provide value-based care compel healthcare providers to improve efficiency and to use an integrated care approach. Transition programs are being used to achieve goals. Transition of care in the context of HF management refers to individual interventions and programs with multiple activities that are designed to improve shifts or transitions from one setting to the next, most often from hospital to home. As transitional care programs become the new normal for patients with chronic HF, it is important to understand the current state of the science of transitional care, as discussed in the available research literature. Of transitional care reports, there was much heterogeneity in research designs, methods, study aims, and program targets, or they were not well described. Often, programs used bundled interventions, making it difficult to discuss the efficiency and effectiveness of specific interventions. Thus, further HF transition care research is needed to ensure best practices related to economically and clinically effective and feasible transition interventions that can be broadly applicable. This statement provides an overview of the complexity of HF management and includes patient, hospital, and healthcare provider barriers to understanding end points that best reflect clinical benefits and to achieving optimal clinical outcomes. The statement describes transitional care interventions and outcomes and discusses implications and recommendations for research and clinical practice to enhance patient-centered outcomes.

Effectiveness of chronic care models: opportunities for improving healthcare practice and health outcomes: a systematic review.

Abstract: The increasing prevalence of chronic disease and even multiple chronic diseases faced by both developed and developing countries is of considerable concern. Many of the interventions to address this within primary healthcare settings are based on a chronic care model first developed by MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation at Group Health Cooperative. This systematic literature review aimed to identify and synthesise international evidence on the effectiveness of elements that have been included in a chronic care model for improving healthcare practices and health outcomes within primary healthcare settings. The review broadens the work of other similar reviews by focusing on effectiveness of healthcare practice as well as health outcomes associated with implementing a chronic care model. In addition, relevant case series and case studies were also included. Of the 77 papers which met the inclusion criteria, all but two reported improvements to healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease. While the most commonly used elements of a chronic care model were self-management support and delivery system design, there were considerable variations between studies regarding what combination of elements were included as well as the way in which chronic care model elements were implemented. This meant that it was impossible to clearly identify any optimal combination of chronic care model elements that led to the reported improvements. While the main argument for excluding papers reporting case studies and case series in systematic literature reviews is that they are not of sufficient quality or generalizability, we found that they provided a more detailed account of how various chronic care models were developed and implemented. In particular, these papers suggested that several factors including supporting reflective healthcare practice, sending clear messages about the importance of chronic disease care and ensuring that leaders support the implementation and sustainability of interventions may have been just as important as a chronic care model’s elements in contributing to the improvements in healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease.

Building primary care in a changing Europe

Abstract: Primary care in Europe is facing high expectations. It is expected that primary care can help health systems become more responsive to changing health needs; offer more integrated care delivery; and increase the efficiency of the system overall. Decision-makers are searching for models to redesign primary care systems in line with these promises. At present, however, international comparative information on the structure, process and outcomes of primary care in Europe is limited. This book seeks to meet the need for information by mapping primary care in 31 European countries using a monitoring instrument developed in the PHAMEU project. In addition to describing essential features of primary care, this volume aims to contribute to answering the question of the added value of strong primary care for the performance of health care systems. (aut. ref.)

Association of Actual and Preferred Decision Roles With Patient-Reported Quality of Care: Shared Decision Making in Cancer Care

Abstract: Importance Shared decision making is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes of cancer treatment, but not all patients prefer to participate in medical decisions. Results from studies of the effect of matching between actual and preferred medical decision roles on patients’ perceptions of care quality have been conflicting. Objectives To determine whether shared decision making was associated with patient ratings of care quality and physician communication and whether patients’ preferred decision roles modified those associations. Design, Setting, and Participants We performed a population- and health system–based survey of participants in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS) study diagnosed with lung and/or colorectal cancer between 2003 and 2005 (56% with colorectal cancer, 40% with non–small-cell lung cancer, and 5% with small-cell lung cancer). The CanCORS study included 9737 patients (cooperation rate among patients contacted, 59.9%) treated in integrated care delivery systems, academic institutions, private offices, and Veterans Affairs hospitals. The medical records were abstracted between October 11, 2005, and April 30, 2009; all analyses were conducted between 2013 and 2014. Interventions We surveyed patients specifically about their preferred roles in cancer treatment decisions and their actual roles in decisions about surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. We analyzed the responses of 5315 patients who completed baseline surveys and reported decision roles for a total of 10 817 treatment decisions and assessed associations of patients’ decision roles with patient-reported quality of care and physician communication. Main Outcomes and Measures The outcomes (identified before data collection) included patient-reported excellent quality of care and top ratings (highest score) on a physician communication scale. Results After adjustment, patients describing physician-controlled (vs shared) decisions were less likely to report excellent quality of care (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.75; P P = .29 for the interaction). Patients describing either actual or preferred physician-controlled (vs shared) roles were less likely to provide a top rating of physician communication (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45-0.66; P P = .002, respectively). The preferred role did not modify the effect of the actual role ( P = .76 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance Physician-controlled decisions regarding lung or colorectal cancer treatment were associated with lower ratings of care quality and physician communication. These effects were independent of patients’ preferred decision roles, underscoring the importance of seeking to involve all patients in decision making about their treatment.

Towards a taxonomy for integrated care: a mixed-methods study

Abstract: Introduction: Building integrated services in a primary care setting is considered an essential important strategy for establishing a high-quality and affordable health care system. The theoretical foundations of such integrated service models are described by the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care, which distinguishes six integration dimensions (clinical, professional, organisational, system, functional and normative integration). The aim of the present study is to refine the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care by developing a taxonomy that specifies the underlying key features of the six dimensions. Methods: First, a literature review was conducted to identify features for achieving integrated service delivery. Second, a thematic analysis method was used to develop a taxonomy of key features organised into the dimensions of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. Finally, the appropriateness of the key features was tested in a Delphi study among Dutch experts. Results: The taxonomy consists of 59 key features distributed across the six integration dimensions of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. Key features associated with the clinical, professional, organisational and normative dimensions were considered appropriate by the experts. Key features linked to the functional and system dimensions were considered less appropriate. Discussion: This study contributes to the ongoing debate of defining the concept and typology of integrated care. This taxonomy provides a development agenda for establishing an accepted scientific framework of integrated care from an end-user, professional, managerial and policy perspective.

Integrating care for older people with complex needs: key insights and lessons from a seven-country cross-case analysis

Abstract: Background: To address the challenges of caring for a growing number of older people with a mix of both health problems and functional impairment, programmes in different countries have different approaches to integrating health and social service supports. Objective: The goal of this analysis is to identify important lessons for policy makers and service providers to enable better design, implementation and spread of successful integrated care models. Methods: This paper provides a structured cross-case synthesis of seven integrated care programmes in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the UK and the USA. Key findings: All seven programmes involved bottom-up innovation driven by local needs and included: (1) a single point of entry, (2) holistic care assessments, (3) comprehensive care planning, (4) care co-ordination and (5) a well-connected provider network. The process of achieving successful integration involves collaboration and, although the specific types of collaboration varied considerably across the seven case studies, all involved a care coordinator or case manager. Most programmes were not systematically evaluated but the two with formal external evaluations showed benefit and have been expanded. Conclusions: Case managers or care coordinators who support patient-centred collaborative care are key to successful integration in all our cases as are policies that provide funds and support for local initiatives that allow for bottom-up innovation. However, more robust and systematic evaluation of these initiatives is needed to clarify the ‘business case’ for integrated health and social care and to ensure successful generalization of local successes.

The Integration of Care for Mental Health, Substance Abuse, and Other Behavioral Health Conditions into Primary Care: Executive Summary of an American College of Physicians Position Paper

Abstract: Behavioral health care includes care for patients around mental health and substance abuse conditions, health behavior change, life stresses and crises, and stress-related physical symptoms. Mental and substance use disorders alone are estimated to surpass all physical diseases as a major cause of worldwide disability by 2020. The literature recognizes the importance of the health care system effectively addressing behavioral health conditions. Recently, there has been a call for the use of the primary care delivery platform and the related patient-centered medical home model to effectively address these conditions. This position paper focuses on the issue of better integration of behavioral health into the primary care setting. It provides an environmental scan of the current state of conditions included in the concept of behavioral health and examines the arguments for and barriers to increased integration into primary care. It also examines various approaches of integrated care delivery and offers a series of policy recommendations that are based on the reviewed information and evidence to inform the actions of the American College of Physicians and its members regarding advocacy, research, and practice.

Telepsychiatry integration of mental health services into rural primary care settings.

Abstract: From a population health perspective, the mental health care system in the USA faces two fundamental challenges: (1) a lack of capacity and (2) an inequitable geographic distribution of services. Telepsychiatry can help address the equity problem, and if applied thoughtfully, can also help address the capacity problem. In this paper we describe how telepsychiatry can be used to address the capacity and equity challenges related to the delivery of mental health services in rural areas. Five models of telepsychiatry are described, including (1) the traditional telepsychiatry referral model, (2) The telepsychiatry collaborative care model, (3) the telepsychiatry behavioural health consultant model, (4) the telepsychiatry consultation-liaison model, and (5) the telepsychiatry curbside consultation model. The strong empirical evidence for the telepsychiatry collaborative care model is presented along with two case studies of telepsychiatry consultation in the context of the telepsychiatry collaborative care model. By placing telepsychiatrists and tele-therapists in consultation roles, telepsychiatry collaborative care has the potential to leverage scarce specialist mental health resources to reach more patients, thereby allowing these providers to have a greater population level impact compared to traditional referral models of care. Comparative effectiveness trials are needed to identify which models of telepsychiatry are the most appropriate for patients with complex psychiatric disorders.

The role of mobile technologies in health care processes: the case of cancer supportive care

Abstract: Background: Health care systems are gradually moving toward new models of care based on integrated care processes shared by different care givers and on an empowered role of the patient. Mobile technologies are assuming an emerging role in this scenario. This is particularly true in care processes where the patient has a particularly enhanced role, as is the case of cancer supportive care. Objective: This paper aims to review existing studies on the actual role and use of mobile technology during the different stages of care processes, with particular reference to cancer supportive care. Methods: We carried out a review of literature with the aim of identifying studies related to the use of mHealth in cancer care and cancer supportive care. The final sample size consists of 106 records. Results: There is scant literature concerning the use of mHealth in cancer supportive care. Looking more generally at cancer care, we found that mHealth is mainly used for self-management activities carried out by patients. The main tools used are mobile devices like mobile phones and tablets, but remote monitoring devices also play an important role. Text messaging technologies (short message service, SMS) have a minor role, with the exception of middle income countries where text messaging plays a major role. Telehealth technologies are still rarely used in cancer care processes. If we look at the different stages of health care processes, we can see that mHealth is mainly used during the treatment of patients, especially for self-management activities. It is also used for prevention and diagnosis, although to a lesser extent, whereas it appears rarely used for decision-making and follow-up activities. Conclusions: Since mHealth seems to be employed only for limited uses and during limited phases of the care process, it is unlikely that it can really contribute to the creation of new care models. This under-utilization may depend on many issues, including the need for it to be embedded into broader information systems. If the purpose of introducing mHealth is to promote the adoption of integrated care models, using mHealth should not be limited to some activities or to some phases of the health care process. Instead, there should be a higher degree of pervasiveness at all stages and in all health care delivery activities. [J Med Internet Res 2015;17(2):e26]

Models of integration of oncology and palliative care.

Abstract: Main problem: Palliative care aims to improve cancer patients’ quality of life through expert symptom management, psychosocial and spiritual care, patient-clinician communication, facilitation of complex decision making, and end-of-life care planning. Over the past few years, there has been increasing interest and evidence to support integration of oncology and palliative care. However, it remains unclear how best to promote integration. The goal of this review is to examine contemporary conceptual models and clinical approaches to integrate oncology and palliative care. Methods: Narrative review. Results: Conceptual models are useful to help stakeholders understand the rationale for integration, to compare the risks and benefits among different practices, and to define a vision towards integration. We will review four major conceptual models of integration, including (I) the time-based model which emphasizes on integration based on chronological criterion; (II) the provider-based (palli-centric) model which discusses primary, secondary and tertiary palliative care; (III) the issue-based (onco-centric) model which illustrates the advantages and disadvantages of the solo practice, congress and integrated care approaches, and (IV) the system-based (patient-centric) model which emphasizes automatic referral based on clinical events. Clinical models provide actual data on the feasibility, efficacy and effectiveness of integration in specific settings. The evidence and challenges related to selected clinical models in integrating oncology and palliative care, such as outpatient palliative care clinics and embedded clinics will be discussed. Conclusions: There are multiple conceptual models and clinical models to promote integration. Further research is needed to inform best practices for integration at different healthcare settings.

Electronic Health Record Challenges, Workarounds, and Solutions Observed in Practices Integrating Behavioral Health and Primary Care

Abstract: Purpose: This article describes the electronic health record (EHR)-related experiences of practices striving to integrate behavioral health and primary care using tailored, evidenced-based strategies from 2012 to 2014; and the challenges, workarounds and initial health information technology (HIT) solutions that emerged during implementation. Methods: This was an observational, cross-case comparative study of 11 diverse practices, including 8 primary care clinics and 3 community mental health centers focused on the implementation of integrated care. Practice characteristics (eg, practice ownership, federal designation, geographic area, provider composition, EHR system, and patient panel characteristics) were collected using a practice information survey and analyzed to report descriptive information. A multidisciplinary team used a grounded theory approach to analyze program documents, field notes from practice observation visits, online diaries, and semistructured interviews. Results: Eight primary care practices used a single EHR and 3 practices used 2 different EHRs, 1 to document behavioral health and 1 to document primary care information. Practices experienced common challenges with their EHRs9 capabilities to 1) document and track relevant behavioral health and physical health information, 2) support communication and coordination of care among integrated teams, and 3) exchange information with tablet devices and other EHRs. Practices developed workarounds in response to these challenges: double documentation and duplicate data entry, scanning and transporting documents, reliance on patient or clinician recall for inaccessible EHR information, and use of freestanding tracking systems. As practices gained experience with integration, they began to move beyond workarounds to more permanent HIT solutions ranging in complexity from customized EHR templates, EHR upgrades, and unified EHRs. Conclusion: Integrating behavioral health and primary care further burdens EHRs. Vendors, in cooperation with clinicians, should intentionally design EHR products that support integrated care delivery functions, such as data documentation and reporting to support tracking patients with emotional and behavioral problems over time and settings, integrated teams working from shared care plans, template-driven documentation for common behavioral health conditions such as depression, and improved registry functionality and interoperability. This work will require financial support and cooperative efforts among clinicians, EHR vendors, practice assistance organizations, regulators, standards setters, and workforce educators.

Systematic review of integrated models of health care delivered at the primary-secondary interface: how effective is it and what determines effectiveness?

Abstract: Integrated multidisciplinary care is difficult to achieve between specialist clinical services and primary care practitioners, but should improve outcomes for patients with chronic and/or complex chronic physical diseases. This systematic review identifies outcomes of different models that integrate specialist and primary care practitioners, and characteristics of models that delivered favourable clinical outcomes. For quality appraisal, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used. Data are presented as a narrative synthesis due to marked heterogeneity in study outcomes. Ten studies were included. Publication bias cannot be ruled out. Despite few improvements in clinical outcomes, significant improvements were reported in process outcomes regarding disease control and service delivery. No study reported negative effects compared with usual care. Economic outcomes showed modest increases in costs of integrated primary-secondary care. Six elements were identified that were common to these models of integrated primary-secondary care: (1) interdisciplinary teamwork; (2) communication/information exchange; (3) shared care guidelines or pathways; (4) training and education; (5) access and acceptability for patients; and (6) a viable funding model. Compared with usual care, integrated primary-secondary care can improve elements of disease control and service delivery at a modestly increased cost, although the impact on clinical outcomes is limited. Future trials of integrated care should incorporate design elements likely to maximise effectiveness.

Towards an international taxonomy of integrated primary care: a Delphi consensus approach

Abstract: Background Developing integrated service models in a primary care setting is considered an essential strategy for establishing a sustainable and affordable health care system. The Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC) describes the theoretical foundations of integrated primary care. The aim of this study is to refine the RMIC by developing a consensus-based taxonomy of key features. Methods First, the appropriateness of previously identified key features was retested by conducting an international Delphi study that was built on the results of a previous national Delphi study. Second, categorisation of the features among the RMIC integrated care domains was assessed in a second international Delphi study. Finally, a taxonomy was constructed by the researchers based on the results of the three Delphi studies. Results The final taxonomy consists of 21 key features distributed over eight integration domains which are organised into three main categories: scope (person-focused vs. population-based), type (clinical, professional, organisational and system) and enablers (functional vs. normative) of an integrated primary care service model. Conclusions The taxonomy provides a crucial differentiation that clarifies and supports implementation, policy formulation and research regarding the organisation of integrated primary care. Further research is needed to develop instruments based on the taxonomy that can reveal the realm of integrated primary care in practice.

The integration of psychology in pediatric oncology research and practice: Collaboration to improve care and outcomes for children and families.

Abstract: Childhood cancers are life-threatening diseases that are universally distressing and potentially traumatic for children and their families at diagnosis, during treatment, and beyond. Dramatic improvements in survival have occurred as a result of increasingly aggressive multimodal therapies delivered in the context of clinical research trials. Nonetheless, cancers remain a leading cause of death in children, and their treatments have short- and long-term impacts on health and well-being. For over 35 years, pediatric psychologists have partnered with pediatric oncology teams to make many contributions to our understanding of the impact of cancer and its treatment on children and families and have played prominent roles in providing an understanding of treatment-related late effects and in improving quality of life. After discussing the incidence of cancer in children, its causes, and the treatment approaches to it in pediatric oncology, we present seven key contributions of psychologists to collaborative and integrated care in pediatric cancer: managing procedural pain, nausea, and other symptoms; understanding and reducing neuropsychological effects; treating children in the context of their families and other systems (social ecology); applying a developmental perspective; identifying competence and vulnerability; integrating psychological knowledge into decision making and other clinical care issues; and facilitating the transition to palliative care and bereavement. We conclude with a discussion of the current status of integrating knowledge from psychological research into practice in pediatric cancer.

The medical home and integrated behavioral health: advancing the policy agenda.

Abstract: There has been a considerable expansion of the patient-centered medical home model of primary care delivery, in an effort to reduce health care costs and to improve patient experience and population health. To attain these goals, it is essential to integrate behavioral health services into the patient-centered medical home, because behavioral health problems often first present in the primary care setting, and they significantly affect physical health. At the 2013 Patient-Centered Medical Home Research Conference, an expert workgroup convened to determine policy recommendations to promote the integration of primary care and behavioral health. In this article we present these recommendations: Build demonstration projects to test existing approaches of integration, develop interdisciplinary training programs to support members of the integrated care team, implement population-based strategies to improve behavioral health, eliminate behavioral health carve-outs and test innovative payment models, and develop population-based measures to evaluate integration.

Health system governance to support integrated mental health care in South Africa: challenges and opportunities

Abstract: While South Africa has a new policy framework supporting the integration of mental health care into primary health care, this is not sufficient to ensure transformation of the health care system towards integrated primary mental health care. Health systems strengthening is needed, incorporating, inter alia, capacity building and resource inputs, as well as good governance for ensuring that the relevant policy imperatives are implemented. To identify systemic factors within institutional and policy contexts that are likely to facilitate or impede the implementation of integrated mental health care in South Africa. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 17 key stakeholders in the Department of Health and Department of Social Development at national level, at provincial level in the North West Province, and at district level in the Dr Kenneth Kaunda district. Participants were purposively identified based on their positions and job responsibilities. Interview questions were guided by a hybrid of Siddiqi et al.’s governance framework principles and Mikkelsen-Lopez et al.’s health system governance approach. Data were analysed using framework analysis in NVivo. Facilitative factors included the recent mental health care policy framework and national action plan that embraces integrated care using a task sharing model and provides policy imperatives for the establishment of district mental health teams to facilitate the development and implementation of district mental health care plans; the roll out of the integrated chronic disease service delivery platform that can be leveraged to increase access and resources as well as decrease stigma; and the presence of NGOs that can assist with service delivery. Challenges included the low prioritisation and stigmatisation of mental illness; weak managerial and planning capacity to develop and implement mental health care plans at provincial and district level; poor pre-service training of generalists in mental health care; weak orientation to integrated care; high staff turnover; weak intersectoral coordination; infrastructural constraints; and no dedicated mental health budget. This study identifies strategies to support and improve integrated mental health care in primary health care services.

Closing the treatment gap for mental, neurological and substance use disorders by strengthening existing health care platforms: strategies for delivery and integration of evidence-based interventions.

Abstract: This paper outlines the main elements and features of a mental health care delivery platform and its delivery channels. These include evidence-based interventions that can be delivered via this platform as well as broader health system strengthening strategies for more effective and efficient delivery of services. The focus is broadly on health systems perspective rather than strictly disorder-oriented intervention analysis. A set of evidence-based interventions within the WHO pyramid framework of self-care, primary care, and specialist care have been identified; the main challenge lies in the translation of that evidence into practice. The delivery of these interventions requires an approach that puts into practice key principles of public health, adopts systems thinking, promotes whole-of-government involvement and is focused on quality improvement. Key strategies for effective translation of evidence into action include collaborative stepped care, strengthening human resources, and integrating mental health into general health care. In order to pursue these principles and strategies using a platform-wide approach, policy makers need to engage with a wide range of stakeholders and make use of the best available evidence in a transparent manner.

Effectiveness of integrated disease management for primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: Results of cluster randomised trial

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long term effectiveness of integrated disease management delivered in primary care on quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with usual care. DESIGN: 24 month, multicentre, pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial, Netherlands Trial Register NTR2268. METHOD: SETTING: 40 general practices in the western part of the Netherlands. Patients with COPD according to GOLD (Global Initiative for COPD) criteria. Exclusion criteria were terminal illness, cognitive impairment, alcohol or drug misuse, and inability to fill in Dutch questionnaires. Practices were included if they were willing to create a multidisciplinary COPD team. General practitioners, practice nurses, and specialised physiotherapists in the intervention group received a two day training course on incorporating integrated disease management in practice, including early recognition of exacerbations and self management, smoking cessation, physiotherapeutic reactivation, optimal diagnosis, and drug adherence. Additionally, the course served as a network platform and collaborating healthcare providers designed an individual practice plan to integrate integrated disease management into daily practice. The control group continued usual care (based on international guidelines). The primary outcome was difference in health status at 12 months, measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ); quality of life, Medical Research Council dyspnoea, exacerbation related outcomes, self management, physical activity, and level of integrated care (PACIC) were also assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of a total of 1086 patients from 40 clusters, 20 practices (554 patients) were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 20 clusters (532 patients) to the usual care group. No difference was seen between groups in the CCQ at 12 months (mean difference -0.01, 95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.08; P=0.8). After 12 months, no differences were seen in secondary outcomes between groups, except for the PACIC domain "follow-up/coordination" (indicating improved integration of care) and proportion of physically active patients. Exacerbation rates as well as number of days in hospital did not differ between groups. After 24 months, no differences were seen in outcomes, except for the PACIC follow-up/coordination domain. CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic study, an integrated disease management approach delivered in primary care showed no additional benefit compared with usual care, except improved level of integrated care and a self reported higher degree of daily activities. The contradictory findings to earlier positive studies could be explained by differences between interventions (provider versus patient targeted), selective reporting of positive trials, or little room for improvement in the already well developed Dutch healthcare system.

The HIV Care Cascade Measured Over Time and by Age, Sex, and Race in a Large National Integrated Care System

Abstract: HIV care cascades can evaluate programmatic success over time. However, methodologies for estimating cascade stages vary, and few have evaluated differences by demographic subgroups. We examined cascade performance over time and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity in Kaiser Permanente, providing HIV care in eight US states and Washington, DC. We created cascades for HIV+ members' age ≥13 for 2010-2012. We measured "linkage" (a visit/CD4 within 90 days of being diagnosed for new patients; ≥1 medical visit/year if established); "retention" (≥2 medical visits ≥60 days apart); filled ART (filled ≥3 months of combination ART); and viral suppression (HIV RNA <200 copies/mL last measured in year). The cascades were stratified by calendar year, sex, age, and race/ethnicity. We found men had statistically (p < 0.05) higher percent linkage, filled ART, and viral suppression for 2010 and 2011 but not for 2012. Women had significantly greater retention for all years. Annually, older age was associated (p < 0.05) with retention, filled ART, and viral suppression but not linkage. Latinos had greater (p < 0.05) retention than whites or blacks in all years, with similar retention comparing blacks and whites. Filled ART and viral suppression was increased (p < 0.05) for whites compared with all racial/ethnic groups in all years. Cascade methodology requiring success at upstream stages before measuring success at later stages (i.e., "dependent" methodology) underreported performance by up to 20% compared with evaluating each stage separately ("independent"). Thus, care results improved over time, but significant differences exist by patient demographics. Specifically, retention efforts should be targeted toward younger patients and blacks; women, blacks, and Latinos require greater ART prescribing.

Integrating funds for health and social care: an evidence review:

Abstract: ObjectivesIntegrated funds for health and social care are one possible way of improving care for people with complex care requirements. If integrated funds facilitate coordinated care, this could s...

Complex interventions for preventing diabetic foot ulceration.

Abstract: Ulceration of the feet, which can lead to the amputation of feet and legs, is a major problem for people with diabetes mellitus, and can cause substantial economic burden. Single preventive strategies have not been shown to reduce the incidence of foot ulceration to a significant extent. Therefore, in clinical practice, preventive interventions directed at patients, health care providers and/or the structure of health care are often combined (complex interventions). The objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of complex interventions on the prevention of foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus compared with single interventions, usual care or alternative complex interventions. A complex intervention is defined as an integrated care approach, combining two or more prevention strategies on at least two different levels of care: the patient, the healthcare provider and/or the structure of healthcare.

Preparing the Workforce for Behavioral Health and Primary Care Integration.

Abstract: Purpose: To identify how organizations prepare clinicians to work together to integrate behavioral health and primary care. Methods: Observational cross-case comparison study of 19 U.S. practices, 11 participating in Advancing Care Together, and 8 from the Integration Workforce Study. Practices varied in size, ownership, geographic location, and experience delivering integrated care. Multidisciplinary teams collected data (field notes from direct practice observations, semistructured interviews, and online diaries as reported by practice leaders) and then analyzed the data using a grounded theory approach. Results: Organizations had difficulty finding clinicians possessing the skills and experience necessary for working in an integrated practice. Practices newer to integration underestimated the time and resources needed to train and organizationally socialize (onboard) new clinicians. Through trial and error, practices learned that clinicians needed relevant training to work effectively as integrated care teams. Training efforts exclusively targeting behavioral health clinicians (BHCs) and new employees were incomplete if primary care clinicians (PCCs) and others in the practice also lacked experience working with BHCs and delivering integrated care. Organizations9 methods for addressing employees9 need for additional preparation included hiring a consultant to provide training, sending employees to external training programs, hosting residency or practicum training programs, or creating their own internal training program. Onboarding new employees through the development of training manuals; extensive shadowing processes; and protecting time for ongoing education, mentoring, and support opportunities for new and established clinicians and staff were featured in these internal training programs. Conclusion: Insufficient training capacity and practical experience opportunities continue to be major barriers to supplying the workforce needed for effective behavioral health and primary care integration. Until the training capacity grows to meet the demand, practices must put forth considerable effort and resources to train their own employees.

Enablers and Barriers in Implementing Integrated Care

Abstract: -The integration of medical and social care aims to address the fragmentation in patient services observed in many health care systems. Increasing rates of chronic disease and multimorbidity have drawn attention to the often significant reforms necessary to address these problems. In this article we discuss how integration may be achieved. To date there is no single best practice model or well-defined guidelines for integration. We suggest that three groups of patients with complex health needs would experience the greatest benefit: multimorbid patients with two or more chronic diseases, patients with moderate or severe mental health conditions, and the elderly. Integration has been demonstrated to achieve improvements in the coordination, quality, efficiency, and cost control of health care. Considering these benefits, a broad effort should be made to implement integrated care.

Evaluation of the Family Integrated Care model of neonatal intensive care: a cluster randomized controlled trial in Canada and Australia.

Abstract: Admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) may disrupt parent-infant interaction with adverse consequences for infants and their families. Several family-centered care programs promote parent-infant interaction in the NICU; however, all of these retain the premise that health-care professionals should provide most of the infant’s care. Parents play a mainly supportive role in the NICU and continue to feel anxious and unprepared to care for their infant after discharge. In the Family Integrated Care (FICare) model, parents provide all except the most advanced medical care for their infants with support from the medical team. Our hypothesis is that infants whose families complete the FICare program will have greater weight gain and better clinical and parental outcomes compared with infants provided with standard NICU care. FICare is being evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial among infants born at ≤ 33 weeks’ gestation admitted to 19 Canadian, 6 Australian, and 1 New Zealand tertiary-level NICU. Trial enrollment began in April, 2013, with a target sample size of 675 infants in each arm, to be completed by August, 2015. Participating sites were stratified by country, and by NICU size within Canada, for randomization to either the FICare intervention or control arm. In intervention sites, parents are taught how to provide most of their infant’s care and supported by nursing staff, veteran parents, a program coordinator, and education sessions. In control sites standard NICU care is provided. The primary outcome is infants’ weight gain at 21 days after enrollment, which will be compared between the FICare and control groups using Student’s t-test adjusted for site-level clustering, and multi-level hierarchical models accounting for both clustering and potential confounders. Similar analyses will examine secondary outcomes including breastfeeding, clinical outcomes, safety, parental stress and anxiety, and resource use. The trial was designed, is being conducted, and will be reported according to the CONSORT 2010 guidelines for cluster randomized controlled trials. By evaluating the impact of integrating parents into the care of their infant in the NICU, this trial may transform the delivery of neonatal care. NCT01852695 , registered December 19, 2012

Electronic Health Record–Based Interventions for Improving Appropriate Diagnostic Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Abstract: Background One driver of increasing health care costs is the use of radiologic imaging procedures. More appropriate use could improve quality and reduce costs. Purpose To review interventions that use the computerized clinical decision-support (CCDS) capabilities of electronic health records to improve appropriate use of diagnostic radiologic test ordering. Data sources English-language articles in PubMed from 1995 to September 2014 and searches in Web of Science and PubMed of citations related to key articles. Study selection 23 studies, including 3 randomized trials, 7 time-series studies, and 13 pre-post studies that assessed the effect of CCDS on diagnostic radiologic test ordering in adults. Data extraction 2 independent reviewers extracted data on functionality, study outcomes, and context and assessed the quality of included studies. Data synthesis Thirteen studies provided moderate-level evidence that CCDS improves appropriateness (effect size, -0.49 [95% CI, -0.71 to -0.26]) and reduces use (effect size, -0.13 [CI, -0.23 to -0.04]). Interventions with a "hard stop" that prevents a clinician from overriding the CCDS without outside consultation, as well as interventions in integrated care delivery systems, may be more effective. Harms have rarely been assessed but include decreased ordering of appropriate tests and physician dissatisfaction. Limitation Potential for publication bias, insufficient reporting of harms, and poor description of context and implementation. Conclusion Computerized clinical decision support integrated with the electronic health record can improve appropriate use of diagnostic radiology by a moderate amount and decrease use by a small amount. Before widespread adoption can be recommended, more data are needed on potential harms. Primary funding source U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007469).

Understanding Care Integration from the Ground Up: Five Organizing Constructs that Shape Integrated Practices

Abstract: Purpose: To provide empirical evidence on key organizing constructs shaping practical, real-world integration of behavior health and primary care to comprehensively address patients’ medical, emotional, and behavioral health needs. Methods: In a comparative case study using an immersion-crystallization approach, a multidisciplinary team analyzed data from observations of practice operations, interviews, and surveys of practice members, and implementation diaries. Practices were drawn from 2 studies of practices attempting to integrate behavioral health and primary care: Advancing Care Together, a demonstration project of 11 practices located in Colorado, and the Integration Workforce Study, a study of 8 practices across the United States. Results: We identified 5 key organizing constructs influencing integration of primary care and behavioral health: 1) Integration REACH (the extent to which the integration program was delivered to the identified target population), 2) establishment of continuum of care pathways addressing the location of care across the range of patient’s severity of illness, 3) approach to patient transitions: referrals or warm handoffs, 4) location of the integration workforce, and 5) participants’ mental model for integration. These constructs intertwine within an organization’s historic and social context to produce locally adapted approaches to integrating care. Contextual factors, particularly practice type, influenced whether specialty mental health and substance use services were colocated within an organization. Conclusion: Interaction among 5 organizing constructs and practice context produces diverse expressions of integrated care. These constructs provide a framework for understanding how primary care and behavioral health services can be integrated in routine practice. (J Am Board Fam Med 2015;28: S7–S20.)

Anxiety and fear of cancer recurrence and its association with supportive care needs and health-care service utilization in cancer patients

Abstract: We investigated the relationship between fear of cancer recurrence (FCR), anxiety, supportive care needs, and utilization of health-care services in a mixed sample of 335 cancer patients. We used validated questionnaires including the Fear of Progression Questionnaire-Short Form (FoP-Q-SF), the General Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) and the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). Health-care services utilization was measured by a self-constructed questionnaire recording the use of 22 health and supportive care offers. In our sample, 3.9 % of patients were classified as having high anxiety and 5.1 % had high FCR. Patients reported the highest unmet supportive care needs in the domain health system and information followed by psychological needs. Integrated care and complementary support services were the most frequently used (32 %) followed by medical (31 %), psychological (23 %), spiritual and religious (8 %) and other support services (9 %). Whereas anxiety was related to both unmet psychological and physical/daily living needs (p < 0.01), FCR was associated with unmet supportive care needs in all five domains further including needs with regard to health system and information, patient care, and sexuality (p < 0.01). However, higher levels of anxiety and FCR were not related to higher utilization of health-care services. Our findings show that FCR plays a significant role in unmet supportive care needs in cancer patients but not for health-care service utilization. We recommend that clinicians monitor supportive care needs in patients struggling with FCR and anxiety.

Integrating Behavioral Health and Primary Care: Consulting, Coordinating and Collaborating Among Professionals.

Abstract: Purpose: This paper sought to describe how clinicians from different backgrounds interact to deliver integrated behavioral and primary health care, and the contextual factors that shape such interactions. Methods: This was a comparative case study in which a multidisciplinary team used an immersion-crystallization approach to analyze data from observations of practice operations, interviews with practice members, and implementation diaries. The observed practices were drawn from 2 studies: Advancing Care Together, a demonstration project of 11 practices located in Colorado; and the Integration Workforce Study, consisting of 8 practices located across the United States. Results: Primary care and behavioral health clinicians used 3 interpersonal strategies to work together in integrated settings: consulting, coordinating, and collaborating (3Cs). Consulting occurred when clinicians sought advice, validated care plans, or corroborated perceptions of a patient9s needs with another professional. Coordinating involved 2 professionals working in a parallel or in a back-and-forth fashion to achieve a common patient care goal, while delivering care separately. Collaborating involved 2 or more professionals interacting in real time to discuss a patient9s presenting symptoms, describe their views on treatment, and jointly develop a care plan. Collaborative behavior emerged when a patient9s care or situation was complex or novel. We identified contextual factors shaping use of the 3Cs, including: time to plan patient care, staffing, employing brief therapeutic approaches, proximity of clinical team members, and electronic health record documenting behavior. Conclusion: Primary care and behavioral health clinicians, through their interactions, consult, coordinate, and collaborate with each other to solve patients9 problems. Organizations can create integrated care environments that support these collaborations and health professions training programs should equip clinicians to execute all 3Cs routinely in practice.