Howard Padwa

Integrating Substance Use Disorder Services with Primary Care: The Experience in California

Abstract Integrating substance use disorder (SUD) services with primary care (PC) can improve access to SUD services for the 20.9 million Americans who need SUD treatment but do not receive it, and help prevent the onset of SUDs among the 68 million Americans who use psychoactive substances in a risky manner. We lay out the reasons for integrating SUD and PC services and then explore the models used and the experiences of providers as they have begun SUD/PC integration in California.

Dual Diagnosis Capability in Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment Programs

Objective: Improved understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of treatment organizations’ dual diagnosis capability is critical in order to guide efforts to improve services. This study assesses programs’ capacity to meet the needs of clients with dual diagnosis, identifies areas where they are well equipped to serve these clients, and determines where programmatic improvement is needed. The study also undertakes an initial exploration of the potential impact that funding sources have on dual diagnosis capability. Methods: We administered Dual Diagnosis Capability in Addiction Treatment (DDCAT) and Dual Diagnosis Capability in Mental Health Treatment (DDCMHT) assessments at 30 treatment programs in two California counties. Seven of the programs received funding to provide both mental health and substance use disorder services, 13 received funding to provide mental health services, and 10 received funding to provide substance use disorder services. Results: The mean DDCAT/DDCMHT score of programs in the sample was 2.83, and just over 43% of the sample met or exceeded DDCAT/DDCMHT criteria for dual diagnosis capability. Programs scored highest and had the highest rates of dual diagnosis capability in domains related to assessment, training, and staffing, whereas scores were weakest and rates of dual diagnosis capability were lowest in the program structure, treatment, and continuity of care domains. Programs that received funding to provide both mental health and substance use disorder services consistently scored higher than the other programs in the sample, and mental health programs scored higher than substance use disorder treatment programs both on the overall assessments and in most domains. Conclusions: Findings suggest that programs in the sample are functioning at a nearly dual diagnosis–capable level. However, structural barriers continue to limit providers’ capacity to serve clients with co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders, and many organizations have not yet translated their potential to deliver dual diagnosis–capable services into practice. By enhancing their program structure, treatment services, and continuity of care services, these treatment organizations should be able to deliver fully dual diagnosis–capable services. Observed differences in dual diagnosis capability based on funding source indicate a need for further research to better understand the impact that funding streams have on dual diagnosis capability.

Identifying and ranking implicit leadership strategies to promote evidence-based practice implementation in addiction health services

BackgroundDespite a solid research base supporting evidence-based practices (EBPs) for addiction treatment such as contingency management and medication-assisted treatment, these services are rarely implemented and delivered in community-based addiction treatment programs in the USA. As a result, many clients do not benefit from the most current and efficacious treatments, resulting in reduced quality of care and compromised treatment outcomes. Previous research indicates that addiction program leaders play a key role in supporting EBP adoption and use. The present study expanded on this previous work to identify strategies that addiction treatment program leaders report using to implement new practices.MethodsWe relied on a staged and iterative mixed-methods approach to achieve the following four goals: (a) collect data using focus groups and semistructured interviews and conduct analyses to identify implicit managerial strategies for implementation, (b) use surveys to quantitatively rank strategy effectiveness, (c) determine how strategies fit with existing theories of organizational management and change, and (d) use a consensus group to corroborate and expand on the results of the previous three stages. Each goal corresponded to a methodological phase, which included data collection and analytic approaches to identify and evaluate leadership interventions that facilitate EBP implementation in community-based addiction treatment programs.ResultsFindings show that the top-ranked strategies involved the recruitment and selection of staff members receptive to change, offering support and requesting feedback during the implementation process, and offering in vivo and hands-on training. Most strategies corresponded to emergent implementation leadership approaches that also utilize principles of transformational and transactional leadership styles. Leadership behaviors represented orientations such as being proactive to respond to implementation needs, supportive to assist staff members during the uptake of new practices, knowledgeable to properly guide the implementation process, and perseverant to address ongoing barriers that are likely to stall implementation efforts.ConclusionsThese findings emphasize how leadership approaches are leveraged to facilitate the implementation and delivery of EBPs in publicly funded addiction treatment programs. Findings have implications for the content and structure of leadership interventions needed in community-based addiction treatment programs and the development of leadership interventions in these and other service settings.

Organizing Publicly Funded Substance Use Disorder Treatment in the United States: Moving Toward a Service System Approach

Historically, publicly funded substance use disorder (SUD) treatment services in the United States have been disorganized and inefficient. By reconfiguring and linking services to create systems of care-services, structures, and processes that are purposively interconnected to treat SUD systematically-health systems can transform discrete service components into cohesive service systems that comprehensively and efficiently treat SUDs. In this article we: (1) articulate the potential benefits of organizing publicly funded SUD services into systems of care; (2) review basic principles underlying theories of SUD system organization; (3) describe the mix and configuration of services needed to create comprehensive, integrated systems of publicly funded SUD care; (4) elucidate how patients can flow through systems of SUD services in a clinically sound and cost-efficient manner, and; (5) propose eight steps that can be taken to create systems of care by identifying and leveraging the strengths, assets, and capacities of SUD service providers already operating within their health care systems. In July 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced opportunities for states to redesign their Medicaid-funded SUD service systems. This paper provides considerations for SUD system design and development.

Barriers to Drug Use Behavior Change Among Primary Care Patients in Urban United States Community Health Centers

In 2011 and 2012, 147 patients in urban United States Community Health Centers who misused drugs, but did not meet criteria for drug dependence, received a brief intervention as part of a National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded clinical trial of a screening and brief intervention protocol. Potential study participants were identified using the World Health Organization (WHO) Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test. Data gathered during brief interventions were analyzed using grounded theory strategies to identify barriers patients believed inhibited drug use behavior change. Numerous perceived barriers to drug use behavior change were identified. Study implications and limitations are discussed.

The Implementation of Integrated Behavioral Health Protocols In Primary Care Settings in Project Care

PURPOSE The majority of adults with mental health (MH) and substance use (SU) disorders in the United States do not receive treatment. The Affordable Care Act will create incentives for primary care centers to begin providing behavioral health (MH and SU) services, thus promising to address the MH and SU treatment gaps. This paper examines the implementation of integrated care protocols by three primary care organizations. METHODS The Behavioral Health Integration in Medical Care (BHIMC) tool was used to evaluate the integrated care capacity of primary care organizations that chose to participate in the Kern County (California) Mental Health Departments Project Care annually for 3years. For a subsample of clinics, change over time was measured. Informed by the Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors, inner and outer contextual factors impacting implementation were identified and analyzed using multiple data sources and qualitative analytic methods. RESULTS The primary care organizations all offered partially integrated (PI) services throughout the study period. At baseline, organizations offered minimally integrated/partially integrated (MI/PI) services in the Program Milieu, Clinical Process - Treatment, and Staffing domains of the BHIMC, and scores on all domains were at the partially integrated (PI) level or higher in the first and second follow-ups. Integrated care services emphasized the identification and management of MH more than SU in 52.2% of evaluated domains, but did not emphasize SU more than MH in any of them. Many of the gaps between MH and SU emphases were associated with limited capacities related to SU medications. Several outer (socio-political context, funding, leadership) and inner (organizational characteristics, individual adopter characteristics, leadership, innovation-values fit) contextual factors impacted the development of integrated care capacity. CONCLUSIONS This study of a small sample of primary care organizations showed that it is possible to improve their integrated care capacity as measured by the BHIMC, though it may be difficult or unfeasible for them to provide fully integrated behavioral health services. Integrated services emphasized MH more than SU, and enhancing primary care clinic capacities related to SU medications may help close this gap. Both inner and outer contextual factors may impact integrated service capacity development in primary care clinics. Study findings may be used to inform future research on integrated care and inform the implementation of efforts to enhance integrated care capacity in primary care clinics.

Improving Coordination of Addiction Health Services Organizations with Mental Health and Public Health Services

In this mixed-method study, we examined coordination of mental health and public health services in addiction health services (AHS) in low-income racial and ethnic minority communities in 2011 and 2013. Data from surveys and semistructured interviews were used to evaluate the extent to which environmental and organizational characteristics influenced the likelihood of high coordination with mental health and public health providers among outpatient AHS programs. Coordination was defined and measured as the frequency of interorganizational contact among AHS programs and mental health and public health providers. The analytic sample consisted of 112 programs at time 1 (T1) and 122 programs at time 2 (T2), with 61 programs included in both periods of data collection. Forty-three percent of AHS programs reported high frequency of coordination with mental health providers at T1 compared to 66% at T2. Thirty-one percent of programs reported high frequency of coordination with public health services at T1 compared with 54% at T2. Programs with culturally responsive resources and community linkages were more likely to report high coordination with both services. Qualitative analysis highlighted the role of leadership in leveraging funding and developing creative solutions to deliver coordinated care. Overall, our findings suggest that AHS program funding, leadership, and cultural competence may be important drivers of program capacity to improve coordination with health service providers to serve minorities in an era of health care reform.

Substance use disorder patient privacy and comprehensive care in integrated health care settings.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expands health insurance coverage for substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, underscoring the value of improving SUD service integration in primarily physical health care settings. It is not yet known to what degree specialized privacy regulations-Code of Federal Regulations Title 42, Part 2 (42 CFR Part 2), in particular-will affect access to or the utilization and delivery of SUD treatment in primary care. In addition to exploring the emerging benefits and barriers that specialized confidentiality regulations pose to treatment in early adopting integrated health care settings, this article introduces and explicates 42 CFR Part 2 to support provider and administrator implementation of SUD privacy regulations in integrated settings. The authors also argue that, although intended to protect patients with SUD, special SUD information protection may inadvertently reinforce stigma against patients by purporting the belief that SUD is different from other health problems and must be kept private. In turn, this stigma may inhibit the delivery of comprehensive integrated care.

Expected Impact of Health Care Reform on the Organization and Service Delivery of Publicly Funded Addiction Health Services

Little is known about how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will be implemented in publicly funded addiction health services (AHS) organizations. Guided by a conceptual model of implementation of new practices in health care systems, this study relied on qualitative data collected in 2013 from 30 AHS clinical supervisors in Los Angeles County, California. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a constructivist grounded theory approach with ATLAS.ti software. Supervisors expected several potential effects of ACA implementation, including increased use of AHS services, shifts in the duration and intensity of AHS services, and workforce professionalization. However, supervisors were not prepared for actions to align their programs’ strategic change plans with policy expectations. Findings point to the need for health care policy interventions to help treatment providers effectively respond to ACA principles of improving standards of care and reducing disparities.

A Mental Health System in Recovery: The Era of Deinstitutionalisation in California

In this chapter, the authors provide snapshots illustrating the development and impact of California’s mental health policies since the 1970s. Using historical primary source documents, oral history interviews and ethnographic observations, the authors tell the stories of how family members of individuals with mental illness, policymakers and clients themselves both reacted to and helped create California’s responses to challenges and paradoxes of deinstitutionalisation. The chapter shows how, in spite of the development of comprehensive community-based services and supports and the emergence of a service delivery philosophy—the recovery model—that was designed to facilitate independence and social integration, lofty ideals of system reform have often proven irreconcilable with clinical and socioeconomic realities. Consequently, neither new mental health services nor new service philosophies have been able to adequately address the significant challenges that Californians with serious mental illness continue to face in the era of deinstitutionalisation.