Establishing an implementation network: lessons learned from community-based participatory research

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Implementation of evidence-based mental health assessment and intervention in community public health practice is a high priority for multiple stakeholders. Academic-community partnerships can assist in the implementation of efficacious treatments in community settings; yet, little is known about the processes by which these collaborations are developed. In this paper, we discuss our application of community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to implementation, and we present six lessons we have learned from the establishment of an academic-community partnership.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>With older adults with psychosis as a focus, we have developed a partnership between a university research center and a public mental health service system based on CBPR. The long-term goal of the partnership is to collaboratively establish an evidence-based implementation network that is sustainable within the public mental healthcare system.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In building a sustainable partnership, we found that the following lessons were instrumental: changing attitudes; sharing staff; expecting obstacles and formalizing solutions; monitoring and evaluating; adapting and adjusting; and taking advantage of emerging opportunities. Some of these lessons were previously known principles that were modified as the result of the CBPR process, while some lessons derived directly from the interactive process of forming the partnership.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The process of forming of academic-public partnerships is challenging and time consuming, yet crucial for the development and implementation of state-of-the-art approaches to assessment and interventions to improve the functioning and quality of life for persons with serious mental illnesses. These partnerships provide necessary organizational support to facilitate the implementation of clinical research findings in community practice benefiting consumers, researchers, and providers.</p

Factors affecting costs and utilization of type 2 diabetes healthcare: a cross-sectional survey among 15 hospitals in urban China

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Type 2 Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) affects persons of all ages, while also placing heavy economic burdens on national economies and healthcare systems. The study aims to investigate the determinants of direct medical cost (DMC), out-of-pocket (OOP) proportion of the cost, and healthcare utilization associated with T2DM.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This cross-sectional study was conducted in four major cities in China. Eligible subjects were adult outpatients who received treatment at one of 15 sampled secondary or tertiary hospitals and consecutively enrolled between March 2007 and May 2007. Generalized estimating equations were used to determine impact factors associated with DMC and healthcare utilization.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Insurance schemes and receiving insulin therapy were significantly associated with a higher annual DMC of T2DM. For each increase in number of complications, there was about 33% increase in annual DMC. Insurance schemes were significantly associated with the proportions of DMC from pocket. A 7% significantly lower proportion of DMC was paid and 23% more clinic visits (AOR = 1.232, P < 0.001) were made by patients admitted at secondary hospitals than tertiary hospitals. The group with higher income (> 2000 CNY/month) paid 23% less from their pocket, compared with the lower income group. The number of complications also significantly increased the outpatient visits (AOR = 1.064, P < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>It implies that preventing complications through the use of more effective treatment regimens is important in order to control the healthcare expenditures of the diseases. Healthcare reform needs to be focused on the medical insurance system and redistribution of patients in hospitals of different levels.</p

The use of adherence aids by adults with diabetes: A cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND: Adherence with medication taking is a major barrier to physiologic control in diabetes and many strategies for improving adherence are in use. We sought to describe the use of mnemonic devices and other adherence aids by adults with diabetes and to investigate their association with control of hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia and hypertension. METHODS: Cross sectional survey of diabetic adults randomly selected from Primary Care practices in the Vermont Diabetes Information System. We used linear regression to examine the associations between the use of various aids and physiologic control among subjects who used oral agents for hyperglycemia, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension. RESULTS: 289 subjects (mean age 65.4 years; 51% female) used medications for all three conditions. Adherence aids were reported by 80%. The most popular were day-of-the-week pill boxes (50%), putting the pills in a special place (41%), and associating pill taking with a daily event such as a meal, TV show, or bedtime (11%). After adjusting for age, sex, marital status, income, and education, those who used a special place had better glycemic control (A1C -0.36%; P = .04) and systolic blood pressure (-5.9 mm Hg; P = .05) than those who used no aids. Those who used a daily event had better A1C (-0.56%; P = .01) than patients who used no aids. CONCLUSION: Although adherence aids are in common use among adults with diabetes, there is little evidence that they are efficacious. In this study, we found a few statistically significant associations with adherence aids and better diabetes control. However, these findings could be attributed to multiple comparisons or unmeasured confounders. Until more rigorous evaluations are available, it seems reasonable to recommend keeping medicines in a special place for diabetic adults prescribed multiple medications

Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication, relapse and rehospitalisation in recent-onset schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aims of this study were to describe outcome with respect to persistent psychotic symptoms, relapse of positive symptoms, hospital admissions, and application of treatment by coercion among patients with recent onset schizophrenia being adherent and non-adherent to anti-psychotic medication.</p> <p>Materials and methods</p> <p>The study included 50 patients with recent onset schizophrenia, schizoaffective or schizophreniform disorders. The patients were clinically stable at study entry and had less than 2 years duration of psychotic symptoms. Good adherence to antipsychotic medication was defined as less than one month without medication. Outcomes for poor and good adherence were compared over a 24-month follow-up period.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The Odds Ratio (OR) of having a psychotic relapse was 10.27 and the OR of being admitted to hospital was 4.00 among non-adherent patients. Use of depot-antipsychotics were associated with relapses (OR = 6.44).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Non-adherence was associated with relapse, hospital admission and having persistent psychotic symptoms. Interventions to increase adherence are needed.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials NCT00184509. Key words: Adherence, schizophrenia, antipsychotic medication, admittances, relapse.</p

Maintenance of response with atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: a post-hoc analysis of 5 double-blind, randomized clinical trials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>How long an antipsychotic is effective in maintaining response is important in choosing the correct treatment for people with schizophrenia. This post-hoc analysis describes maintenance of response over 24 or 28 weeks in people treated for schizophrenia with olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone, or aripiprazole.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a post-hoc analysis using data from 5 double-blind, randomized, comparative trials of 24 or 28 weeks duration in which olanzapine was compared to risperidone (1 study; N = 339), quetiapine (1 study; N = 346), ziprasidone (2 studies; N = 548 and 394) or aripiprazole (1 study; N = 566) for treatment of schizophrenia. For each study, time to loss of response in patients who met criteria for response at Week 8 and the proportion of patients who lost response following Week 8 were compared by treatment group. The number needed to treat (NNT) with olanzapine rather than comparator to avoid loss of one additional responder over 24 or 28 weeks of treatment was calculated for each study.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Time maintained in response was significantly longer (p < .05) for olanzapine compared to risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone. Olanzapine did not significantly differ from aripiprazole. The proportion of patients who lost response was significantly lower for olanzapine versus risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone (p < .05). NNTs to avoid one additional patient with loss of response with olanzapine versus risperidone, quetiapine and ziprasidone were favourable, ranging from 5 to 9.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>During 24 and 28 weeks of treatment, the antipsychotics studied differed in the time that treated patients with schizophrenia remained in response and the proportion of patients who lost response. Olanzapine treatment resulted in a consistent and statistically significant advantage in maintenance of response compared to treatment with risperidone, quetiapine and ziprasidone; but not compared to treatment with aripiprazole.</p

Early response predicts subsequent response to olanzapine long-acting injection in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial of treatment for schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In patients with schizophrenia, early non-response to oral antipsychotic therapy robustly predicts subsequent non-response to continued treatment with the same medication. This study assessed whether early response predicted later response when using a long-acting injection (LAI) antipsychotic.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were taken from an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of olanzapine LAI in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia (n = 233). Early response was defined as ≥30% improvement from baseline to Week 4 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS_0-6) Total score. Subsequent response was defined as ≥40% baseline-to-endpoint improvement in PANSS_0-6Total score. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and predictive accuracy were calculated. Clinical and functional outcomes were compared between Early Responders and Early Non-responders.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Early response/non-response to olanzapine LAI predicted later response/non-response with high sensitivity (85%), specificity (72%), PPV (78%), NPV (80%), and overall accuracy (79%). Compared to Early Non-responders, Early Responders had significantly greater improvement in PANSS_0-6Total scores at all time points and greater baseline-to-endpoint improvement in PANSS subscale scores, Quality of Life Scale scores, and Short Form-36 Health Survey scores (all p ≤ .01). Among Early Non-responders, 20% demonstrated response by Week 8. Patients who lacked early improvement (at Week 4) in Negative Symptoms and Disorganized Thoughts were more likely to continue being non-responders at Week 8.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Among acutely ill patients with schizophrenia, early response predicted subsequent response to olanzapine LAI. Early Responders experienced significantly better clinical and functional outcomes than Early Non-responders. Findings are consistent with previous research on oral antipsychotics.</p> <p>Clinical Trials Registry</p> <p>F1D-MC-HGJZ: Comparison of Intramuscular Olanzapine Depot With Placebo in the Treatment of Patients With Schizophrenia <url>http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088478?term=olanzapine+depot&rank=3</url></p> <p>Registry identifier - <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088478">NCT00088478</a></p

Costs of treating patients with schizophrenia who have illness-related crisis events

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Relatively little is known about the relationship between psychosocial crises and treatment costs for persons with schizophrenia. This naturalistic prospective study assessed the association of recent crises with mental health treatment costs among persons receiving treatment for schizophrenia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were drawn from a large multi-site, non-interventional study of schizophrenia patients in the United States, conducted between 1997 and 2003. Participants were treated at mental health treatment systems, including the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, community mental health centers, community and state hospitals, and university health care service systems. Total costs over a 1-year period for mental health services and component costs (psychiatric hospitalizations, antipsychotic medications, other psychotropic medications, day treatment, emergency psychiatric services, psychosocial/rehabilitation group therapy, individual therapy, medication management, and case management) were calculated for 1557 patients with complete medical information. Direct mental health treatment costs for patients who had experienced 1 or more of 5 recent crisis events were compared to propensity-matched samples of persons who had not experienced a crisis event. The 5 non-mutually exclusive crisis event subgroups were: suicide attempt in the past 4 weeks (n = 18), psychiatric hospitalization in the past 6 months (n = 240), arrest in the past 6 months (n = 56), violent behaviors in the past 4 weeks (n = 62), and diagnosis of a co-occurring substance use disorder (n = 413).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Across all 5 categories of crisis events, patients who had a recent crisis had higher average annual mental health treatment costs than patients in propensity-score matched comparison samples. Average annual mental health treatment costs were significantly higher for persons who attempted suicide ($46,024), followed by persons with psychiatric hospitalization in the past 6 months ($37,329), persons with prior arrests ($31,081), and persons with violent behaviors ($18,778). Total cost was not significantly higher for those with co-occurring substance use disorder ($19,034).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Recent crises, particularly suicide attempts, psychiatric hospitalizations, and criminal arrests, are predictive of higher mental health treatment costs in schizophrenia patients.</p

Variation in diabetes care by age: opportunities for customization of care

BACKGROUND: The quality of diabetes care provided to older adults has usually been judged to be poor, but few data provide direct comparison to other age groups. In this study, we hypothesized that adults age 65 and over receive lower quality diabetes care than adults age 45–64 years old. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of members of a health plan cared for by multiple medical groups in Minnesota. Study subjects were a random sample of 1109 adults age 45 and over with an established diagnosis of diabetes using a diabetes identification method with estimated sensitivity 0.91 and positive predictive value 0.94. Survey data (response rate 86.2%) and administrative databases were used to assess diabetes severity, glycemic control, quality of life, microvascular and macrovascular risks and complications, preventive care, utilization, and perceptions of diabetes. RESULTS: Compared to those aged 45–64 years (N = 627), those 65 and older (N = 482) had better glycemic control, better health-related behaviors, and perceived less adverse impacts of diabetes on their quality of life despite longer duration of diabetes and a prevalence of cardiovascular disease twice that of younger patients. Older patients did not ascribe heart disease to their diabetes. Younger adults often had explanatory models of diabetes that interfere with effective and aggressive care, and accessed care less frequently. Overall, only 37% of patients were simultaneously up-to-date on eye exams, foot exams, and glycated hemoglobin (A1c) tests within one year. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the need for further improvement in diabetes care for all patients, and suggest that customisation of care based on age and explanatory models of diabetes may be an improvement strategy that merits further evaluation