Improving practice in community-based settings: a randomized trial of supervision – study protocol

Background: Evidence-based treatments for child mental health problems are not consistently available in public mental health settings. Expanding availability requires workforce training. However, research has demonstrated that training alone is not sufficient for changing provider behavior, suggesting that ongoing intervention-specific supervision or consultation is required. Supervision is notably under-investigated, particularly as provided in public mental health. The degree to which supervision in this setting includes ‘gold standard’ supervision elements from efficacy trials (e.g., session review, model fidelity, outcome monitoring, skill-building) is unknown. The current federally-funded investigation leverages the Washington State Trauma-focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Initiative to describe usual supervision practices and test the impact of systematic implementation of gold standard supervision strategies on treatment fidelity and clinical outcomes. Methods/Design The study has two phases. We will conduct an initial descriptive study (Phase I) of supervision practices within public mental health in Washington State followed by a randomized controlled trial of gold standard supervision strategies (Phase II), with randomization at the clinician level (i.e., supervisors provide both conditions). Study participants will be 35 supervisors and 130 clinicians in community mental health centers. We will enroll one child per clinician in Phase I (N = 130) and three children per clinician in Phase II (N = 390). We use a multi-level mixed within- and between-subjects longitudinal design. Audio recordings of supervision and therapy sessions will be collected and coded throughout both phases. Child outcome data will be collected at the beginning of treatment and at three and six months into treatment. Discussion This study will provide insight into how supervisors can optimally support clinicians delivering evidence-based treatments. Phase I will provide descriptive information, currently unavailable in the literature, about commonly used supervision strategies in community mental health. The Phase II randomized controlled trial of gold standard supervision strategies is, to our knowledge, the first experimental study of gold standard supervision strategies in community mental health and will yield needed information about how to leverage supervision to improve clinician fidelity and client outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT0180026

Developing Telemental Health Partnerships Between State Medical Schools and Federally Qualified Health Centers: Navigating the Regulatory Landscape and Policy Recommendations

BackgroundFederally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) deliver care to 26 million Americans living in underserved areas, but few offer telemental health (TMH) services. The social missions of FQHCs and publicly funded state medical schools create a compelling argument for the development of TMH partnerships. In this paper, we share our experience and recommendations from launching TMH partnerships between 12 rural FQHCs and 3 state medical schools.ExperienceThere was consensus that medical school TMH providers should practice as part of the FQHC team to promote integration, enhance quality and safety, and ensure financial sustainability. For TMH providers to practice and bill as FQHC providers, the following issues must be addressed: (1) credentialing and privileging the TMH providers at the FQHC, (2) expanding FQHC Scope of Project to include telepsychiatry, (3) remote access to medical records, (4) insurance credentialing/paneling, billing, and supplemental payments, (5) contracting with the medical school, and (6) indemnity coverage for TMH.RecommendationsWe make recommendations to both state medical schools and FQHCs about how to overcome existing barriers to TMH partnerships. We also make recommendations about changes to policy that would mitigate the impact of these barriers. Specifically, we make recommendations to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid about insurance credentialing, facility fees, eligibility of TMH encounters for supplemental payments, and Medicare eligibility rules for TMH billing by FQHCs. We also make recommendations to the Health Resources and Services Administration about restrictions on adding telepsychiatry to the FQHCsâ Scope of Project and the eligibility of TMH providers for indemnity coverage under the Federal Tort Claims Act.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149739/1/jrh12323_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149739/2/jrh12323.pd

The Use of Herbal Medications and Dietary Supplements by People with Mental Illness

This study examined the relationship between herbal medication and dietary supplement (HMDS) use and mental health characteristics. Data are drawn from a national household survey of the United States’ civilian, non-institutionalized population (N = 9,585). Psychiatric medication and HMDS use, psychiatric diagnoses and treatment needs, utilization and satisfaction were assessed. Compared to non-users, HMDS users were more likely to perceive themselves as having mental health needs, to have received mental health and primary care treatment, and to be dissatisfied with their overall healthcare. Psychiatric medication use was not related to HMDS use, and in multivariate analyses, HMDS use was associated with perceived mental health needs. Differences in use of specific HMDS between those with and without a psychiatric disorder were also examined. The use of HMDS warrants particular attention in persons with perceived mental health problems as these individuals may be turning to HMDS use for treatment of their symptoms

Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care including PST and an antidepressant treatment algorithm for the treatment of major depressive disorder in primary care; a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorder is currently one of the most burdensome disorders worldwide. Evidence-based treatments for depressive disorder are already available, but these are used insufficiently, and with less positive results than possible. Earlier research in the USA has shown good results in the treatment of depressive disorder based on a collaborative care approach with Problem Solving Treatment and an antidepressant treatment algorithm, and research in the UK has also shown good results with Problem Solving Treatment. These treatment strategies may also work very well in the Netherlands too, even though health care systems differ between countries. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a two-armed randomised clinical trial, with randomization on patient-level. The aim of the trial is to evaluate the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care in the Netherlands by means of an adapted collaborative care framework, including contracting and adherence-improving strategies, combined with Problem Solving Treatment and antidepressant medication according to a treatment algorithm. Forty general practices will be randomised to either the intervention group or the control group. Included will be patients who are diagnosed with moderate to severe depression, based on DSM-IV criteria, and stratified according to comorbid chronic physical illness. Patients in the intervention group will receive treatment based on the collaborative care approach, and patients in the control group will receive care as usual. Baseline measurements and follow up measures (3, 6, 9 and 12 months) are assessed using questionnaires and an interview. The primary outcome measure is severity of depressive symptoms, according to the PHQ9. Secondary outcome measures are remission as measured with the PHQ9 and the IDS-SR, and cost-effectiveness measured with the TiC-P, the EQ-5D and the SF-36. DISCUSSION: In this study, an American model to enhance care for patients with a depressive disorder, the collaborative care model, will be evaluated for effectiveness in the primary care setting. If effective across the Atlantic and across different health care systems, it is also likely to be an effective strategy to implement in the treatment of major depressive disorder in the Netherlands

Hundred forty eight more days with depression: the association between marital conflict and depression-free days.

BackgroundAlthough collaborative care programs are effective in improving late-life depression, only about half of treated patients achieve clinically meaningful improvement. Thus, we need to examine what characteristics may predict poor late-life depression course. Despite the robust evidence for the negative association between the quality of couple relationships and depression outcomes, few studies have examined these associations in the context of long-term late-life depression course.AimThe objective of this study is to examine the relations between the severity of couple conflict, receiving collaborative depression care program, and 24-months depression outcomes.MethodsStudy sample comprised 840 depressed older adults subsample from the improving mood, promoting access to collaborative treatment for late-life depression trial (IMPACT). Depression and couple conflict were assessed at baseline, 12-month, and 24-month follow-up. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analyses were performed to examine mean 24-month depression-free days (DFD) and the marginal effects of receiving IMAPCT program over usual care among participants with varying degrees of 24-month couple conflict.ResultsCompared with those who never endorsed frequent couple conflict over the three observation points, those who did twice had 63 fewer DFD (p = 0.01), and those who did three times experienced 148 fewer DFD (p < 0.001). Although the marginal effects of receiving IMPACT program over usual care was greater in overall sample, it was not statistically significant among those who endorsed frequent conflict at two or three times.ConclusionFrequent couple conflict is associated with worse long-term late-life depression outcomes among the patients in primary care clinics

Older Adults With Severe, Treatment-Resistant Depression

Depression is a common, disabling, and costly condition encountered in older patients. Effective strategies for detection and treatment of late-life depression are summarized based on a case of a 69-year-old woman who struggled with prolonged depression. Clinicians should screen older patients for depression using a standard rating scale, initiate treatment such as antidepressant medications or evidence-based psychotherapy, and monitor depression symptoms. Patients who are not improving should be considered for psychiatric consultation and treatment changes including electroconvulsive therapy. Several changes in treatment approaches are usually needed before patients achieve complete remission. Maintenance treatment and relapse-prevention planning (summarization of early warning signs for depression, maintenance treatments such as medications, and other strategies to reduce the risk of relapse [eg, regular physical activity or pleasant activities]) can reduce the risk of relapse. Collaborative programs, in which primary care clinicians work closely with mental health specialists following a measurement-based treatment-to-target approach, are significantly more effective than typical primary care treatment