Transcript Document
Building and Sustaining
Relationships between
Primary and Behavioral Healthcare
Amy M. Kilbourne, PhD, MPH
VA Ann Arbor Serious Mental Illness Treatment
Research and Evaluation Center
Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan
Learning Objectives
1. To understand the multilevel, system-level barriers to
implementing the Chronic Care Model for
depression management in primary care settings,
particularly those focused on practice and provider
issues
2. To identify potential barriers to fostering relationships
between primary care and mental health providers,
and strategies for strengthening collaborations with
primary care and mental health providers
3. To understand the concept of Participatory
Management and how it could be used to identify
and reduce barriers to implementation, notably by
making the business cases to providers
Barriers to Integrated Behavioral
Health-Primary Care:
6-P Framework
Patients/Consumers (e.g., symptoms)
Providers (e.g., time, tools, training, territory)
Practices/Clinical (e.g., lack of systems to
coordinate care, cultural differences)
Health Plans/Organizations (e.g., financing)
Purchasers/State (e.g., not on radar screen, lack
of info on return-on-investment)
Populations/Policies (e.g., stigma)
PCP, MH Provider Barriers
Turnover
Losing interest
Competing demands
Territories
PCP, MH Provider Strategies
Turnover
ID 2-3 champions
Losing interest
Periodic CMEs, trainings
Regularly report performance
Visit practices
Competing demands
Find “win-win”
opportunities
(e.g., streamline intakes)
Territories
Respect cultural differences
(e.g., privacy concerns)
Implementing Change:
Participatory Management
Combines traditional and emerging approaches:
Barrier and solution “analysis”
Obtain buy-in upfront
Adapt new strategies via shared decision making
Shift decision making authority to stakeholders AND
“end users” (e.g., front-line staff, consumers)
Recognition of day-to-day barriers, culture of practices
Help senior leaders and front line staff understand
what’s in it for them
Customization to specific settings
Participatory Management
Provider,
Plan, and
Consumer
Input
Adapted
Chronic
Care
Model
Process 1:
ID
strategy
Provider,
consumer
feedback
Process 2:
Customize
Process 3:
Evaluate
Provider,
consumer
consensus
Process 4:
Implement
Provider,
consumer
buy-in
Improved
Process,
outcomes
Participatory Management
PM Process
Process 1: Design
Process 2:
Customization
Process 3: Evaluation
and Refinement
Process 4:
Implementation
Components
Identify model and barriers to
implementation, solutions
Cross-functional team of
consumers, providers to refine
model based on potential barriers
Establish measures
Piloting and further customization
Full-scale intervention
Formative evaluation, ROI
Participatory Management:
WCHO Integrated Care Program
National learning community to foster integrated
care headquartered in southeastern MI
Wide range in size, # providers, years providing
integrated care, but some common themes:
45% are rural
38% no joint MH-PC staff meetings
38% do not share common medical record
47% collect symptom data, 41% Rx, Labs
WCHO Learning Community
Common Barriers
Culture (“finding BH providers who know
primary care and vice-versa,” “differences in
philosophies”)
Funding (“siloed at state level,” different rules
across populations, regions)
Provider lack of time/space to coordinate
Client complexity, privacy concerns
Lack of real-time data on client outcomes
Lack of “clear mission” or “model”
Challenges
Resources
Administrative/Operations
Financing
Governance
Clinical
Addressing Challenges
Administrative/Operations
Templates for MOUs, agreements, job descriptions, responsibilities
IT barriers (firewalls) and privacy concerns
Common methods for analyzing data and measures
Financing
State variations in funding rules, creative funding sources
Start-up costs
CPT codes and reimbursement
Demonstrate cost efficiency, return-on-investment
Governance
Input on political issues
Liability (professional roles, clinical responsibility)
Clinical
Cultural differences and readiness to change (providers, organizations)
Lack of protocols and clarity in delineation of roles, balancing workflow
Lack of common integrated care model
Involvement of ERs
Sustaining provider use of integrated care strategies
Making the Business Case
Clinical (outcomes, processes of care)
Organizational (fidelity)
Economic (costs)
Social (satisfaction, stories)
Making the Business Case
Momentum and Lessons Learned
RWJF Depression in Primary Care
National Demonstration Program
Linking clinical and economic strategies
8 organizations: 4 Medicaid
Washington Circle Indicators
Bringing performance measurement to
consumers, purchasers
VA Primary Care-Mental Health
Integration Initiative
Clinical Performance Measures
No-show rates
% achieving remission (PHQ-9)
% on pharmacotherapy >=6 months
% receiving recommended toxicity monitoring
tests for medications
# hospitalizations/ER visits
% receiving follow-up care post-hospitalization
Making the Business Case
WIIFM?
Benefits depend on audience
Practice
Plan
State
Counts towards QI activity
√
√
Empowers providers
√
Reduces costs (inpatient, etc.)
√
√
√
Reduces duplicative care (Rx)
√
√
√
Applicable to other populations
√
√
Attractive to purchasers
√
√
Summary: 6-P Framework:
Strategies to Reduce Barriers
Patient/
Consumer
Providers
• Education on privacy issues and confidentiality
• Evaluate preferences, promote self-management
• Opinion leaders from PC, BH
• Provide guidelines, communication with care manager
Practices/
Clinical
• Invest in care management (NP, MSW, RN)
• Improve information systems – establish registry
Plan/Organization
• Comprehensive outcomes data (claims, consumer)
• Develop a business case
Purchasers
(State/Private)
• Return-on-investment (State-level data)
• Persistence in light of “crisis du jour”
Populations
and Policies
• Engage community stakeholders
• Increase demand for quality care, enhance advocacy
Pincus et al. 2003; Kilbourne et al. 2008