Patient-Reported Outcomes for Fully Vaccinated COVID-19 Patients Over 6 Weeks: The Experiences of Clinical Breakthrough Cases.

BACKGROUND: While coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have high rates of efficacy, fully vaccinated individuals can become infected with COVID-19. Among this population, symptoms tend to be less severe and shorter lasting. Less is known about how vaccinated individuals who contract COVID-19 experience the disease through patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and how this changes over time. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the physical, mental, and social health PROs for fully vaccinated individuals who contracted COVID-19 over a 6-week period. DESIGN: Prospective design using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System short-form (PROMIS-10) collected through a mobile application-based platform. PARTICIPANT: 1114 fully vaccinated patients who tested positive for COVID-19 at a large US health system and engaged with the study on or after 1 March 2021 and reported onset of illness prior to 1 November 2021. MAIN MEASURES: Global physical and mental health PROMIS-10 T-scores for the 6-week period, component PROMIS-10 questions for the 6-week period, and component PROMIS-10 questions restricted to a subset of participants for the first month to measure individual recovery were analyzed. KEY RESULTS: Mean global physical and mental health T-scores increased over time and remained within one standard deviation of the population mean. At baseline, at least 40% of participants reported good health for all component questions except Fatigue (25%), and the proportion reporting good health increased over time for all questions, with the largest improvements in Fatigue (25.5 to 67.5%), Pain (59.1 to 82.8%), and Emotional Problems (42.3 to 62.5%). Over the first month, the greatest positive changes in individual recovery were observed for Fatigue (65.0%), Pain (53.0%), and Emotional Problems (41.1%); at least 30% of respondents reported no change in at least one category, and the greatest decreases were for Usual Social Activities (23.9%), Social Satisfaction (23.2%), and Mental Health (21.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an important step towards better understanding the impact of \u27breakthrough\u27 COVID-19 infections on clinically engaged, fully vaccinated patients\u27 physical and mental health to improve support for their treatment and recovery

Evaluation of Shared Experiences Among Patients and Providers Following Behavioral Health Integration in Primary Care.

Behavioral health integration (BHI) changes the paradigm of primary care delivery by integrating behavioral healthcare into primary care. Thus, BHI likely alters the shared experiences of both patients and providers in an interrelated manner; however, their experiences are usually evaluated separately. The purpose of this study was to analyze these shared experiences together within patient-provider pairs in integrated clinics. First, patient interviews were conducted using semi-structured interview guides and transcripts were analyzed for major themes of patient experience. Next, providers named in patient interviews were interviewed around these same themes. Thematic analysis was performed on 18 transcripts (11 patients, 7 providers). Common themes included BHI experience, pain management, feeling heard by providers, and health care experiences. Areas of alignment included positive perception of BHI, an absence of long-term care, and a desire to share decision-making. Pain management was a persistent area of conflict, and the differing experiences were consistent with a change in the psychodynamic patient-provider model. This conflict highlights a gap in BHI and a need for provider education about psychodynamic relationship models

Patient Experiences in Behavioral Health Integrated Primary Care Settings: the Role of Stigma in Shaping Patient Outcomes over Time

Behavioral health integration (BHI) models seek to improve patient experience and outcomes by bridging physical and behavioral health services. Past BHI research has not focused on stigma in these settings, which has been previously found to impact patient engagement and outcomes. We surveyed patients over a two year period at 12 integrated clinics in Oregon using measures developed by a Patient Advisory Team. Over a quarter of respondents reported stigmatization (26.81%). Compared to non-stigmatized patients, those who reported stigma had five times the odds of reporting unmet health needs (OR=5.14,

Patient experiences in behavioral health integrated primary care settings: the role of stigma in shaping patient outcomes over time.

Behavioral health integration (BHI) models seek to improve patient experience and outcomes by bridging physical and behavioral health services. Past BHI research has not focused on stigma in these settings, which has been previously found to impact patient engagement and outcomes. We surveyed patients over a two year period at 12 integrated clinics in Oregon using measures developed by a Patient Advisory Team. Over a quarter of respondents reported stigmatization (26.81%). Compared to non-stigmatized patients, those who reported stigma had five times the odds of reporting unmet health needs (OR=5.14,

Behavioral Health Integration and Outcomes that Matter to Patients: a Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Observational Study.

Research on behavioral health integration (BHI) often explores outcomes for quality and cost, but less is known about impacts of integration work on key patient experience outcomes. A mixed-methods longitudinal study of BHI was conducted in 12 primary care clinics in Oregon to assess how adoption of key integration practices including integrated staffing models, integrated care trainings for providers, and integrated data sharing impacted a set of patient experience outcomes selected and prioritized by an advisory panel of active patients. Results showed that adopting key aspects of integration was not associated with improved patient experience outcomes over time. Patient interviews highlighted several potential reasons why, including an overemphasis by health systems on the structural aspects of integration versus the experiential components and potential concerns among patients about stigma and discrimination in the primary care settings where integration is focused