Jennifer L. Wright-Berryman

A review of consumer-provided services on assertive community treatment and intensive case management teams: implications for future research and practice.

BACKGROUND: Assertive community treatment (ACT) is an evidence-based practice that provides intensive, in vivo services for adults with severe mental illness. Some ACT and intensive case management teams have integrated consumers as team members with varying results. METHODS: The authors reviewed the literature examining the outcomes of having consumer providers on case management teams, with attention devoted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: Sixteen published studies were identified, including eight RCTs. Findings were mixed, with evidence supporting consumer-provided services for improving engagement and limited support for reduced hospitalizations. However, evidence was lacking for other outcomes areas such as symptom reduction or improved quality of life. CONCLUSION: Including a consumer provider on an ACT team could enhance the outreach mechanisms of ACT, using a more recovery-focused approach to bring consumers into services and help engage them over time. More rigorous research is needed to further evaluate integrating consumer providers on teams.

A comparison of self-reported and phone-administered methods of ACT fidelity assessment: a pilot study in Indiana.

OBJECTIVE Monitoring fidelity of assertive community treatment (ACT) teams is costly. This study investigated the reliability and validity of a less burdensome approach: self-reported assessment. METHODS Phone-administered and self-reported assessments were compared for 16 ACT teams. Team leaders completed a self-report protocol providing information sufficient to score the Dartmouth Assertive Community Treatment Scale (DACTS). Two raters scored the DACTS using only self-reported information. Two additional raters conducted phone interviews with team leaders, verifying the self-reported data, and independently scored the DACTS. RESULTS DACTS total scores obtained via self-reported assessments were reliable and valid compared with phone-administered assessment on the basis of interrater consistency (intraclass correlation) and consensus (mean rating differences). Phone-administered assessments agreed with self-reported assessments within .25 scale points (out of 5 points) for 15 of 16 teams. CONCLUSIONS A self-report approach could address concerns regarding costs of monitoring as part of a stepped approach to quality assurance.

Consumer and provider responses to a computerized version of the Illness Management and Recovery Program.

OBJECTIVE To explore mental health consumer and provider responses to a computerized version of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program. METHOD Semistructured interviews were conducted to gather data from 6 providers and 12 consumers who participated in a computerized prototype of the IMR program. An inductive-consensus-based approach was used to analyze the interview responses. RESULTS Qualitative analysis revealed consumers perceived various personal benefits and ease of use afforded by the new technology platform. Consumers also highly valued provider assistance and offered several suggestions to improve the program. The largest perceived barriers to future implementation were lack of computer skills and access to computers. Similarly, IMR providers commented on its ease and convenience, and the reduction of time intensive material preparation. Providers also expressed that the use of technology creates more options for the consumer to access treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The technology was acceptable, easy to use, and well-liked by consumers and providers. Clinician assistance with technology was viewed as helpful to get clients started with the program, as lack of computer skills and access to computers was a concern. Access to materials between sessions appears to be desired; however, given perceived barriers of computer skills and computer access, additional supports may be needed for consumers to achieve full benefits of a computerized version of IMR.

Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity.

Assertive community treatment is known for improving consumer outcomes, but is difficult to implement. On-site fidelity measurement can help ensure model adherence, but is costly in large systems. This study compared reliability and validity of three methods of fidelity assessment (on-site, phone-administered, and expert-scored self-report) using a stratified random sample of 32 mental health intensive case management teams from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Overall, phone, and to a lesser extent, expert-scored self-report fidelity assessments compared favorably to on-site methods in inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. If used appropriately, these alternative protocols hold promise in monitoring large-scale program fidelity with limited resources.

Managing physical and mental health conditions: Consumer perspectives on integrated care

ABSTRACT Despite the growing trend of integrating primary care and mental health services, little research has documented how consumers with severe mental illnesses (SMI) manage comorbid conditions or view integrated services. We sought to better understand how consumers perceive and manage both mental and physical health conditions and their views of integrated services. We conducted semi-structured interviews with consumers receiving primary care services integrated in a community mental health setting. Consumers described a range of strategies to deal with physical health conditions and generally viewed mental and physical health conditions as impacting one another. Consumers viewed integration of primary care and mental health services favorably, specifically its convenience, friendliness, and knowledge of providers, and collaboration between providers. Although integration was viewed positively, consumers with SMI may need a myriad of strategies and supports to both initiate and sustain lifestyle changes that address common physical health problems.

Physical Health Decision-Making Autonomy Preferences for Adults with Severe Mental Illness in Integrated Care

ABSTRACT People with severe mental illness (SMI) often have physical health comorbidities that are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Although work is being done to integrate physical and behavioral health care in order to address the primary health-care needs of persons with SMI, very little is known about their health-care behaviors and how they make their treatment decisions. We used a cross-sectional, survey design to explore the relationship between variables related to decision-making autonomy preferences for persons with SMI (N = 95) who were seen in an integrated health-care clinic. Descriptive and bivariate analyses revealed that the majority of participants in this sample preferred shared decision making in their physical health care, that male participants desired higher autonomy in decision making, and that lower perceived autonomy support from the physician was related to higher desired autonomy in decision making The findings suggest that social workers and other mental and physical health providers should explore the unique decision-making autonomy preferences of primary care service users with SMI, as these preferences vary among clients, and that honoring individual preferences would provide a more person-centered care environment.

Factor Structure of the Autonomy Preference Index in People with Severe Mental Illness

People vary in the amount of control they want to exercise over decisions about their healthcare. Given the importance of patient-centered care, accurate measurement of these autonomy preferences is critical. This study aimed to assess the factor structure of the Autonomy Preference Index (API), used widely in general healthcare, in individuals with severe mental illness. Data came from two studies of people with severe mental illness (N=293) who were receiving mental health and/or primary care/integrated care services. Autonomy preferences were assessed with the API regarding both psychiatric and primary care services. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate fit of the hypothesized two-factor structure of the API (decision-making autonomy and information-seeking autonomy). Results indicated the hypothesized structure for the API did not adequately fit the data for either psychiatric or primary care services. Three problematic items were dropped, resulting in adequate fit for both types of treatment. These results suggest that with relatively minor modifications the API has an acceptable factor structure when asking people with severe mental illness about their preferences to be involved in decision-making. The modified API has clinical and research utility for this population in the burgeoning field of autonomy in patient-centered healthcare.

Physical health decision making and decision aid preferences of individuals with severe mental illness

ABSTRACT Individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) often suffer from comorbid physical health conditions that reduce quality of life and longevity. The integrated care movement has improved access to primary care services, but system change does not necessarily impact health behaviors. In an effort to better understand health behaviors of persons with SMI in integrated care, we explored physical health decision making and decision aid preferences. We conducted three focus groups, including two consumer groups and one mental health staff group. Data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach, employing independent coding, thematic analysis, and meaning-making processes. Data suggest that overall, the consumer groups preferred a shared decision making process, with the doctor making the final treatment decision. Staff indicated that decision making depended on a consumer’s functioning level. Consumers liked the idea of using a decision aid, and reported preferring the computerized aid. Staff felt that decision aids were dependent on consumer level of functioning. Consumers generally view primary care doctors as experts, but like the idea of using decision aids to assist in making medical decisions. Staff feel that consumers may need help in both decision making and decision aid use in primary care.